Remembering the CG Computer-Generated Pandemic Tyranny

[monart]

Remembering the CG Computer-Generated Pandemic Tyranny

 

It's been nearly four years since the "Covid-19 pandemic" campaign was announced (March 11, 2020) by the WHO and subsequently implemented by governments throughout the world -- using fear and force to "lockdown" then "vaccinate" billions of misinformed and misled, confused and compliant masses.

How did the Covid-19 pandemic come to be? How did such a pandemic tyranny get established so quickly and easily?

For one's mental and moral health, as well as one's physical health, in order to keep on the betterment of oneself, find out what really was/is the Covid-19 Pandemic.

 

How to Establish a Pandemic Tyranny (with or without an actual virus)

 

 

Tyranny can be established in a few strokes, in countries where rights are not absolute and inviolate, and where they can be even more restricted in emergencies (i.e., in all countries). The extent of the tyranny depends on the severity of the emergency. Wars, terrorist attacks, and natural disasters are common justifications for invoking emergency tyrannical powers.

 

Epidemics and pandemics are among the less common justifications, but have advantages for tyrants that war and disasters do not have. When the “enemy” is sub/microscopic and invisible, it is easier to fool and frighten the people into believing in the emergency and accepting the tyranny.

Indeed, a viral enemy is even more effective for fear-mongering than a bacterial enemy, a virus being far more minuscule and mysterious than bacteria.

 

For the first time in history, a pandemic tyranny was successfully established, all across the globe. How was it done?

 

1. Conduct pandemic simulations (“Event 201”, “Crimson Contagion”) to train and prime, among other effects, the health authorities and policy makers for the “real” pandemic to come.

 

2. Have the “outbreak” start in tyrannical China, where the truth is whatever the Party decrees, and the whip and gun is its main method of persuasion – and in Wuhan, with its pre-existing epidemic of respiratory illness/death caused by severe air pollution, which can be renamed "covid", as needed.

 

3. Have WHO previously lower the criteria for declaring a pandemic – and then to extol China as the exemplar for the rest of the world to emulate in response to the new invisible enemy, to be quickly named as SARS-CoV2.

 

4. Have the Chinese doctors claim that the pandemic is caused by a coronavirus, but a “novel” one - so that it could have the frightening and flexible characteristics as needed to initiate, manipulate, and sustain the belief in the pandemic.

 

5. Do not require that the novel coronavirus be isolated, purified, quantified, or uniquely characterized - so that its true nature (even if it exists) would not be there as a reality-check on the downstream computer modeling, testing protocols, case numbers, and mandates on social distancing, masking, and vaccination.

 

6. Create epidemiological models that predict, on demand, apocalyptic infections and deaths, with ready excuses that failed predictions are actually successes due to heeding the models and implementing lockdowns and mandates.

 

7. Design testing protocols, such as over-amplifiable PCR tests (designed for research, not diagnostic use), and the even less valid, proxy tests like anti-gen tests and sewage surveillance tests. These tests can yield false positives, as needed, on demand. Then saturate the population with tests, tests, and more tests.

 

8. Inflate the test-derived case numbers by providing incentives to re-label other respiratory infections as “covid-19” and ignore or downplay co-morbidities. The pre-existing common colds linked to already known coronaviruses are plentiful sources for claiming covid cases.

 

9. Refer to government health authorities as “top doctors”, whose scientific expertise is beyond question or reproach. Marginalize and punish those who question, challenge, or expose the covid irrationality - dismiss as being purveyors of “misinformation” and as threats to public health.

 

10. Ensure the medical/health, educational/academic institutions, and mainstream media are allied with the campaign - so that the masses are both intimidated and comforted in their fear and obedience, with little question or protest.

 

11. Enroll the evermore power-seeking politicians to enact the policies already in place by invoking public-health/emergency powers - so that the increased tyranny appears legitimate and legal, and the masses accept as necessary.

 

12. Join forces with the vaxxers and mass-advertise the vaccine as the only way out of the pandemic and the lockdowns - so that the masses rush into long line-ups for the shots - so that the psycho-socio-medical experiments and conditioning, among other agendas, can be perpetrated and perpetuated - and so that the test-kit and vaccine manufacturers and purveyors continue to make their billions.

 

---

 

The key and essential preconditions for this covert./overt campaign to establishing a pandemic tyranny include the following:

 

- A legally enslaved society where government controlled and tax-funded healthcare and education (along with the other welfare statist policies) are already widespread, which condition the people into dependency, conformity, and obedience.

 

- An intellectually and morally bankrupt world where collectivism (mob rule), altruism (self-sacrifice), and mysticism (faith) prevail, institutionally and politically, over individualism, rights, and reason – where delusion is believed over objective reality and consensus overrides logic and facts.

 

---

 

How to demolish this pandemic tyranny? By exposing the massive deception that it is (as shamdemic, plandemic, covert-19).  Learn and understand, teach and advocate, declare and defend - ultimately to establish and institutionalize the philosophy of reality, reason, rights, and romance – and create a free, rational, individualist society.

 

------

 

“. . . The truth twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools.” – Rudyard Kipling, “If”

“Fools rush in where angels fear to tread.” – Alexander Pope, “An Essay on Criticism”

“The action is the aim and the aim is the action.” – Zarlenga, The Orator

“Don’t bother examining [too much] a folly, ask only what it accomplishes.” –Ayn Rand, The Fountainhead

 

=====

 

Image: Like in a movie, the CG world of SARS-Cov2....

Edited January 26 by monart

[monart]

[Feb 11, 2022]

 

It was evident from the first Wuhan reports of a "novel coronavirus" that there was deception involved in the propagation of the claim of a SAR-CoV-2 pandemic. The consequent Covid-19 tyranny has since been justified on the basis of a fraud: that SARS-CoV-2 has been proven to exist. But, in reality, it hasn't been.

 

To exist is to have identity. Existence is Identity. If SARS-CoV-2 is claimed to exist, its identity must also be defined and shown to be distinct from all other existents. It must be isolated and purified from all other substances in order to be distinguished separately. Only then could its characteristics and any infectious qualities be discovered and verified. But this purification and identification has not yet been accomplished, only a deceptive appearance of having done so.

 

As of today, Feb 11, 2022 - 166 Freedom of Information (FOI) requests to health and science institutions worldwide, by Christine Massey and her team, for any documentation of SARS-CoV-2 having been isolated and purified, have resulted in responses of "No records found". As written on Christine Massey's webpage https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/?fbclid=IwAR3Mr8pWM3y1gXcSNf23zlUyj7bNdklh2f-IXSn7YgP5rTZa5TYzF6J0jhY

"Would a sane person mix a patient sample (containing various sources of genetic material and never proven to contain any alleged “virus”) with transfected monkey kidney cells, fetal bovine serum and toxic drugs, then claim that the resulting concoction is “SARS-COV-2 isolate” and ship it off internationally for use in critical research (including vaccine and test development)?

"Because that’s the sort of fraudulent monkey business that’s being passed off as “virus isolation” by research teams around the world."

 

In the past two years, numerous voices have drawn attention to this fraud, but they've been ignored or maligned by the mainstream media and the medical/virologist professions as a whole, and thus the governments continued their tyranny. But the deception is becoming more and more exposed, and the tyrants will be backing off, having achieved their goals, even if their fraud doesn't get known by the masses.

 

A few significant books have already been published exposing one or another part of the fraud. _Virus Mania_ , authored by a team of MDs, PhD, led by a journalist, is one such book on the non-isolation of CoV-2.

 

Edited January 26 by monart

[Boydstun]

Monart, are you saying these guys have it wrong? That you know they are wrong?

We had a CDC when the Asian Flu hit in 1957-58 in the US. We knew it was coming in advance. A lab developed an effective vaccine. It was not being produced quickly enough to save many people, so Ike got funding for ramping up the rate. It hit children the most. In terms of today's US population, it resulted in the equivalence of about 200,000 deaths here. State and federal government did not opt to close schools. Many were closed by lack of attendance. If those governments had not ordered businesses closed during the Covid sweep, impact on family economies and the general economy would have been by private decisions and the course of nature, and there would have been no rationale for government to compensate people whom it had prohibited from production. Not that today most people think such a rationale is needed for a check from the Treasury. 

I scoured the New York Times archive for its coverage of the Asian Flu (Indonesia) pandemic in those years. It was little mentioned, and the main concern was that it not impact readiness of our military. The revolution in communications technology since then was surely a factor, I'd say, in the drastic difference in how the Times covered the two pandemics. I was able to monitor day by day whether a friend of mine in a federal prison in Ohio had died from his case of Covid by using this information resource as tipoff for further search (this map).

[tadmjones]

That blog post describes in general how viruses ‘work’ , even the mechanism by which the corona virus in question binds to the  human ACE2 receptor site. But it doesn’t explain how a virus from a bat that doesn’t use a bat ACE2 receptor site evolved so quickly and with such affinity to that site in humans. There was/is speculation that a chimera virus was assembled with the needed furin cleavage site to facilitate such affinity, but blogs posts suggesting those types of analysis would be more ‘in the weeds’ and not for the laymen as this blog example is expressly targeted.

Intentionally released or not , it is obvious that Covid was the product of virus fuckery.

[monart]

4 hours ago, Boydstun said:

Monart, are you saying these guys have it wrong? That you know they are wrong?

 

Hi Stephen,

No, (regarding the claim that SARS-Cov2 has been proven to exist) I'm saying, that, up to even today, no records have been found, in response to FOIA requests to government health/research labs all over the world, for documents reporting the isolation and purification of SARS-CoV2 apart from other biological matter. The whole "pandemic" is based on the assumption by nearly everyone that SARS-Cov2 has been scientifically proven by someone to exist -- when no record is available of anyone who has.

Here is an earlier post (Feb 13, 2022) on this topic.

-----

Exposing the Pandemic Tyranny

I. SARS-CoV-2 Still Not Proven to Exist (2)

 

The fact that, more than 2 years later, there are still no records of SARS-CoV-2 having been isolated and identified, strikes at the root of the pandemic deception (shamdemic). For that reason, more attention should be given to understanding what isolation/purification is and why it should be done. If the alleged novel coronavirus hasn't been scientifically identified, then neither do all the testing, drug treatments, vaccines - government emergency powers - have any validity or justification.

 

A helpful guide to gaining this understanding is a section in a significant new book, _Virus Mania_, (mentioned in previous post): "Lack of Detection of So-Called SARS-CoV-2", in the final chapter, "Total Corona Mania" of a 515-page volume, with 1456 references. It's the 3rd English 2021 Edition, first published in Germany in 2007 (currently Amazon Bestseller in Microbiology).

 

Excerpts from that section follow (reference numbers omitted):

---------

Lack of Detection of So-Called SARS-CoV-2

 

... Complete purification is an indispensable pre-requisite for virus identi­fication as stated by textbooks, virus researchers such as Luc Montagnier [see attached image at the end] and the second of Koch’s postulates...

 

“Purification”… means the separation of an object from everything that does not belong to … Only on the basis of such a complete purification can it be proven that the nucleic acid sequences found in the particles in question originate from a new virus.

 

For this, one must remember that the PCR is extremely sensitive. This means that it can “pick up" even the smallest genetic fragments-i.e. DNA or RNA fragments. But it is not possible with the PCR to determine where these nucleic acid sequences come from. This must be determined beforehand in a separate process. And since PCR tests are “calibrated” to nucleic acid sequences, in this case RNA sequences (since it is assumed that SARS-CoV-2 is an RNA virus), it must of course be clearly proven that these genetic fragments are actually part of the claimed virus. And in order to prove this beyond any doubt, the correct isolation and complete purification of the suspected virus are indispensable pre-requisites.

…

Thus, when cells, cell debris and particles are mixed in a laboratory culture, the only way to determine which RNA (or even proteins) are viral is to separate the particles from all non-viral material. However, some researchers use the term “isolation” in their work to give the impression to the uninitiated reader that a virus has been isolated in pure form. In fact, however, this has not happened, because the procedures described in these works do not represent a proper process of isolation including complete purification. Conse­quently, they misuse the term “isolation” in their publications.

And so we decided to be the first in the world to ask the research teams of the relevant papers cited in connection with the alleged detection of SARS-CoV-2 whether the elec­tron microscope images shown in their in vitro studies depict completely purified viruses. However, not a single team of authors-including those of two pivotal studies (Zhu et al., Wan Beom Park et al. ) - could answer this question with a yes. And it should be noted that no one wrote back suggesting that complete purification is not a necessary step for solid virus detection. [See attached image at the end]

 

We only received answers such as “our electron microscope image does not show a com­pletely purified virus” (see table, which has been published in the article that appeared in the OffGuardianon June 27,2020 and was the first in the world to fundamentally demon­strate that SARS-CoV-2 PCR is without substance: “COVID-19 PCR-Tests Are Scientifically Meaningless” by Torsten Engelbrecht and Konstantin Demeter), Altogether, the authors of five relevant papers (Zhu et al.,1353 Wan Beom Park et al.), which are mentioned in connection with the detection of SARS-CoV-2, conceded on request that they did not complete purification.

 

We also contacted Charles Calisher, who is a seasoned virologist. In 2001, Science published an “impassioned plea ...to the younger generation" from several veteran virologists, among them Calisher, saying that “[modern virus detection methods like] sleek polymerase chain reaction ...tell little or nothing about how a virus multiplies, which animals carry it, [or] how it makes people sick. [It is] like trying to say whether somebody has bad breath by looking at his fingerprint.” And that’s why we asked Calisher whether he knows of a single paper in which SARS-CoV-2 had been isolated and then truly purified. His answer: “I know of no such a publication. I have kept an eye out for one.”

…

If no such particle “purification” has been done anywhere, how can one claim that the RNA obtained is part of a viral genome? And how can such RNA then be widely used to di­agnose infection with a new virus? We have asked these two questions to numerous rep­resentatives of the official corona narrative worldwide, but nobody could answer them.

 

The fact that the RNA sequences that the scientists extracted from the tissue samples and which the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR tests were finally “calibrated” belong to a new patho­genic virus called SARS-CoV-2 is therefore based on faith alone, not on sound research. Consequently, it cannot be concluded that the “pulled” RNA genetic sequences in these studies, belong to a very specific virus, in this case SARS-CoV-2, which can then be “de­tected" by the developed RT-PCR test.

 

We have also looked at all the studies claiming to have isolated and even tested the virus. But in all of them, they actually did something very different: the researchers took samples from the throat or Lungs of patients, ultracentrifuged them (spun them at high speed) to separate the larger/heavy from the smaller/lighter molecules, and then took the supernatant, the upper part of the centrifuged material. And this is what they called their “isolate,” to which they then applied the PCR.

 

But this supernatant contains all kinds of molecules, billions of different micro- and nanoparticles, including extracellular vesicles (EVs) and exosomes, which are produced by our own body and are often indistinguishable from viruses: “Nowadays, it is an al­most impossible mission to separate EVs and viruses by means of canonical vesicle isolation methods, such as differential ultracentrifugation, because they are frequently co-pelleted due to their similar dimension," as it said in the study “The Role of Extra­cellular Vesicles as Allies of HIV, HCV and SARS Viruses,” published in May 2020 in the journal Viruses.

 

So how do you extract a specific virus from this huge mixture of billions of indistin­guishable particles, including naturally occurring exosomes? Well, you simply cannot, it is impossible, unless you have purified the particles of whom you think they belong to a new virus beforehand (and then you have to define its genetic structure and dis- ease-causing properties).

 

In fact, the scientists “create” the virus by PCR: They take artificial and entirely hypothetical primers (previously existing genetic sequences available in genetic banks) and put them in touch with the supernatant of the pharyngeal or broncho-alveolar fluid of the patient, that is with tens of billions of RNA and DNA molecules; and if, as it is likely, the primers attach to something in that broth, they conclude that whatever attached to the primers, then forming a DNA molecule with the help of the enzyme reverse transcriptase, it is the new and unknown SARS-CoV-2.

 

As if that weren’t enough, the primers used are just an infinitesimal fragment of the al­leged genome of the virus; they are in fact made up of only 18 to 24 bases (nucleotides) each; while the SARS-CoV-2 virus is assumed to consist of 30,000 bases, that is to say the primers represent only 0.07 percent of the virus genome. How is it possible to select the specific virus you are Looking for with such a minute sequence, and moreover in a sea of billions of virus-like particles? Again, it is just impossible! As the virus you are looking for is new, there are clearly no ready “off-the-shelf” genetic primers to match the specific fraction of the new virus. Instead, you take primers that you believe may be close to the hypothesized virus structure, but it’s only a rough guess. When you apply the primers to the supernatant broth, they can attach to any one of the billions of molecules present in it, and you have no idea if what you generated is from the virus you are looking for.

…

Incidentally, SARS-CoV-2 was “pieced together" on the computer. The physician Thomas Cowan called this “scientific fraud.” He wrote on October 15, 2020: “This week, my col­league and friend Sally Fallon Morell brought to my attention an amazing article put out by the CDC, published in June 2020. The article’s purpose was for a group of about 20 virologists to describe the state of the science of the isolation, purification and biological characteristics of the new SARS-CoV-2 virus, and to share this information with other scientists for their own research. A thorough and careful reading of this important paper reveals some shocking findings.” In fact, the article section “Whole Genome Sequencing” shows that rather than having isolated the virus and sequencing the genome from end to end, that the CDC“ designed 37 pairs of nested PCRs spanning the genome on the basis of the coronavirus reference sequence (GenBank accession no. NC045512).’’

 

...Consequently, it cannot be concluded that the RNA gene sequences “pulled” from the tis­sue samples prepared in these studies and “calibrated” to the PCR tests belong to a very specific virus, in this case SARS-CoV-2. Especially since the electron microscope images, which are supposed to represent SARS-CoV-2, actually show particles that vary greatly in size. In one paper, the particles range from 60 nm to 140 nm. A specific virus that has such extreme size variation cannot exist by definition.

-------------

VIRUS MANIA: How the Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics, Making Billion- Dollar Profits at Our Expense

 

Authors:

Torsten Engelbrecht

Dr. Claus Kbhnlein, MD

Dr. Samantha Bailey, MD

Dr. Stefano Scoglio, BSc PhD

Forewords:

Prof. Etienne de Harven, MD

Dr. Kelly Brogan MD

Dr. Andrew Kaufman, MD

Topics:

Corona/COVID-19, Measles, Swine Flu, Avian Flu, Cervical Cancer, SARS, BSE, Hepatitis C, AIDS, Polio, Spanish Flu

Edited January 26 by monart

[Boydstun]

Monart, so bottom line, if I'm understanding you correctly: we are not in a position to know that anyone has proven (in the appropriate sense of the word proven) that a SARS-Covid virus exists? Not that we should conclude that it does not exist, only that we should not be concluding that it does exist?

I am personally not in a position to know by the dispositive physical evidence that any virus of any sort exists. I don't even have a microscope, and the reports are that even that would not do the trick. I don't have time to learn all things from the fundamental evidence.

(In my apartment, I did once check out for myself what Newton had reported one would observe concerning the shape of the water surface in his rotating bucket-of-water experiment. He told true, and indeed, it was only after my own demonstration that I could understand perfectly clearly what he had been describing.)

There is much I count as science and scientific medicine I take for true because I've had some science education and have formed for myself some maps to most reliable sources for solid science reporting. I don't have the background training or willingness to invest my time in virus science to understand adequately what you or those guys mean. My scientific doctor advises I get such-and-such medicine to take for such-and-such potential or manifest physical problem. I pay everyone and do it.

I credit researchers in microbiology, and research of big pharma, and my doctors with having pulled me back from death bearing down from infection by HIV, and I still follow the guidance of those physicians to keep me alive even while I have that infection. (No one was ever successful in developing a vaccine for that virus, and so far as I know, no one ever claimed that they had done so.) My closeness to research on that virus and its hideouts and mutations is not more than from reading my Scientific American. I never got Covid. I took the vaccines. They make me a little sick for a day, but then I'm fine. I'll stay with my past social lines to scientific truth and sources of expert advice. I'll continue to think that there is that Covid virus and that it is an air-borne transmission and take sensible precautions against it based on that relayed science.

Edited January 26 by Boydstun

[monart]

6 hours ago, Boydstun said:

Monart, so bottom line, if I'm understanding you correctly: we are not in a position to know that anyone has proven (in the appropriate sense of the word proven) that a SARS-Covid virus exists? Not that we should conclude that it does not exist, only that we should not be concluding that it does exist?

 

Stephen. Yes, absence of evidence is not evidence of absence - or, more precisely, absence of evidence alone is not evidence of absence. But then the onus of proof is on they who assert, not on others to prove that the assertion is false.

As I presented in my previous posts:  No records have been located that document the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV2.

No expertise in virology is needed, just basic logic, to understand that, without such proof of the virus' existence, the virus is hypothetical, and nothing downstream (testing, masking, distancing, lockdowns, vaccination) is valid or justified when derived from this alleged existence. And granting the "experts" (and the governments) some benefit of the doubt, when none is justified, is to surrender one's independent judgement to these alleged "experts".

Edited January 27 by monart

[monart]

18 hours ago, tadmjones said:

Intentionally released or not , it is obvious that Covid was the product of virus fuckery.

Intentionally, accidentally, from bats, from labs -- it's irrelevant to the fundamental question: Where is the documentation that SARS=CoV2 has been isolated, purified, and identified?

[tadmjones]

20 minutes ago, monart said:

Intentionally, accidentally, from bats, from labs -- it's irrelevant to the fundamental question: Where is the documentation that SARS=CoV2 has been isolated, purified, and identified?

I make the inference from the direct evidence of the funding for research into gain of function. Granted that research in and of itself does not ‘prove’ the existence of a specific virus. But in nd of itself , it certainly strongly points to fuckery, yeah ?

[AlexL]

8 hours ago, monart said:

No records have been located that document the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV2.

Here is what Bard AI bot says (I know, I know!):

Q: Was the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2 documented? Where?

Bard: 

Quote

Yes, the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2 were documented in a number of scientific publications. Here are a few examples:

• "A Novel Coronavirus Associated with Severe Pneumonia in Wuhan, China" (Cell, 2020) by Zhang et al. This paper describes the isolation and characterization of SARS-CoV-2 from the first patient diagnosed with COVID-19.

• "The First Known Case of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the United States" (New England Journal of Medicine, 2020) by Abbink et al. This paper describes the isolation and characterization of SARS-CoV-2 from the first patient diagnosed with COVID-19 in the United States.

• "SARS-CoV-2 Production, Purification Methods and UV Inactivation for Proteomics and Structural Studies" (PLOS ONE, 2021) by Zhou et al. This paper describes a method for purifying SARS-CoV-2 for use in proteomics and structural studies.

• "SARS-CoV-2 Isolation and Characterization of the First US COVID-19 Patient" (PMC, 2020) by Bollyky et al. This paper describes the isolation and characterization of SARS-CoV-2 from the first patient diagnosed with COVID-19 in the United States.

These are just a few examples, and there are many other scientific publications that have documented the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2. The isolation and characterization of SARS-CoV-2 was a critical step in the development of diagnostic tests, vaccines, and treatments for COVID-19.

Having had bad previous experiences with AI bots, I insisted:

Q: Please double check the above info.

Bard: 

Quote

The provided information on the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2 is accurate and encompasses a representative sample of the scientific literature on this topic. The following points further corroborate the accuracy of the provided information:

1. Relevance of the cited publications: The cited publications, including "A Novel Coronavirus Associated with Severe Pneumonia in Wuhan, China" (Cell, 2020), "The First Known Case of SARS-CoV-2 Infection in the United States" (New England Journal of Medicine, 2020), and "SARS-CoV-2 Production, Purification Methods and UV Inactivation for Proteomics and Structural Studies" (PLOS ONE, 2021), are all peer-reviewed articles published in high-impact scientific journals. These publications provide credible and authoritative information on the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2.

2. Timeline of publications: The cited publications span the initial identification of SARS-CoV-2 in early 2020 to the development of purification methods for research applications in 2021. This timeline reflects the chronological progression of research on SARS-CoV-2 and the importance of isolating and purifying the virus for further study.

3. Accuracy of the descriptions: The descriptions of the isolation, purification, and identification processes are consistent with established scientific protocols and methodologies. These descriptions provide a clear understanding of the steps involved in obtaining pure SARS-CoV-2 samples for research purposes.

In conclusion, the provided information on the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2 is accurate and well-supported by the scientific literature. These studies played a crucial role in understanding the nature of SARS-CoV-2 and enabling the development of diagnostic tests, vaccines, and treatments to combat COVID-19.

Therefore, maybe - just maybe - there are records that document the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2.

I also verified the existence of (2 out of 4) of the cited articles and they do exist indeed.

Edited January 27 by AlexL
Format

[monart]

15 hours ago, tadmjones said:

I make the inference from the direct evidence of the funding for research into gain of function. Granted that research in and of itself does not ‘prove’ the existence of a specific virus. But in nd of itself , it certainly strongly points to fuckery, yeah ?

Yes, you may be right about the funding for gain of function research, but if it had anything to do with the "novel" SARS-CoV2, there is, to date, no record of it having been isolated and purified.

[monart]

15 hours ago, AlexL said:

Here is what Bard AI bot says (I know, I know!):

Q: Was the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2 documented? Where?

Bard: 

Having had bad previous experiences with AI bots, I insisted:

Q: Please double check the above info.

Bard: 

Therefore, maybe - just maybe - there are records that document the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2.

I also verified the existence of (2 out of 4) of the cited articles and they do exist indeed.

You asked an AI bot, and it says yes. But Christine Massey and her team, referenced in my 2nd post, asked through FOIA requests, hundreds of government/research institutions all over the world, including CDC and Health Canada, and they all say, "No Records Found".  What gives? Maybe the AI bot took "isolation" to mean "isolated from patient", not "isolated from all other biological material" -- the latter is what the FOIA requests specifically and explicitly defined as "isolation". Apparently, the research labs did not perform the latter, just the former. So "No Records Found." On this topic, see also my 3rd post with excerpts from the book Virus Mania.

(I read that Zhang et.al paper, listed by the AI bot, about 3 years ago, and it reported "isolation" from the alleged novel coronavirus patient only, not from all other substances.)
 

Edited January 28 by monart

[AlexL]

6 hours ago, monart said:

You asked an AI bot, and it says yes.

The AI bot doesn't simply say yes, but also provides references;

Quote

But Christine Massey ... asked through FOIA requests... and they all say, "No Records Found".

Christine Massey says she asked and says that she received only "No Records Found". Christine Massey also says "Virology is not a science, [it is] made for pandemics and vaccines". (BTW, the exact arguments you are providing appear in the article The shocking research if Christine Massey on the site YogaEsoteric, among other😁)

Quote

What gives? Maybe the AI bot took "isolation" to mean "isolated from patient", not "isolated from all other biological material"

Maybe, however e.g. this of the 4 cited articles is titled "SARS-CoV-2 Production, Purification Methods and UV Inactivation for Proteomics and Structural Studies", has "Purification" in its title... But if you claim that the study described did not respect the virology standards required to warrant the conclusion that SARS-CoV-2 was thus isolated, then you should substantiate this claim. The onus of proof is on you because I only said "maybe - just maybe - there are records that document the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2", but you were affirmative.

Edited January 28 by AlexL

[monart]

On 1/28/2024 at 5:29 AM, AlexL said:

The onus of proof is on you because I only said "maybe - just maybe - there are records that document the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV-2", but you were affirmative.

Thanks for pursuing this, Alex. As I acknowledged in my reply to Stephen, absence of evidence, alone, is not evidence of absence. I do not definitively claim that SARS-CoV2 does not exist, just that it has not been proven to exist, based on the fact that Christine Massey's FOIA requests to government-medical institutions (now at 220 of them) resulted in "no records found". So, yes, maybe there are records, like the papers you offered that seem to be such, but may not be (as explained in the Virus Mania excerpts in my 3rd post responding to Stephen).  If there are actually records, why haven't the FOIA agencies have not cited them? Is it just ignorance and Incompetence?

[AlexL]

32 minutes ago, monart said:

Virus Mania excerpts...

Can you please give the full title of this book? TIA

[monart]

13 hours ago, AlexL said:

Can you please give the full title of this book? TIA

Yes, I copy from the aforementioned post:

 

VIRUS MANIA: How the Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics, Making Billion-Dollar Profits at Our Expense

 

... the final chapter, "Total Corona Mania" of a 515-page volume, with 1456 references. It's the 3rd English 2021 Edition, first published in Germany in 2007 (currently Amazon Bestseller in Microbiology)

 

Authors:

 

Torsten Engelbrecht

Dr. Claus Kbhnlein, MD

Dr. Samantha Bailey, MD

Dr. Stefano Scoglio, BSc PhD

Forewords:

Prof. Etienne de Harven, MD

Dr. Kelly Brogan MD

Dr. Andrew Kaufman, MD

 

Topics:

 

Corona/COVID-19, Measles, Swine Flu, Avian Flu, Cervical Cancer, SARS, BSE, Hepatitis C, AIDS, Polio, Spanish Flu

[EC]

This is a ridiculous thread. My own grandfather died of COVID and I know plenty of people that have had it. It exists. 

[AlexL]

16 hours ago, monart said:

VIRUS MANIA: How the Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics, Making Billion-Dollar Profits at Our Expense

Therefore, they fabricate epidemics and amass wealth through fraudulent means.

This was the full title of the 2007 edition. The augmented July 2020 edition is titled 

VIRUS MANIA: Corona/COVID-19, Measles, Swine Flu, Cervical Cancer, Avian Flu, SARS, BSE, Hepatitis C, AIDS, Polio. How the Medical Industry Invents Epidemics, Making Billion-Dollar Profits At Our Expense.

From the book description:

Quote

the authors of "Virus Mania" ... show that this fearmongering is unfounded ... The existence, the pathogenicity and the deadly effects of these agents have never been proven... real causes of the illnesses named COVID-19, avian flu, AIDS or Spanish flu [are] pharmaceuticals, lifestyle drugs, pesticides, heavy metals, pollution, malnutrition and stress.

Therefore I urge you to refrain from citing this book as evidence for any claim. It only subverts its credibility.

About

On 1/29/2024 at 4:13 PM, monart said:

SARS-CoV2 ... has not been proven to exist... maybe there are records, like the papers you offered that seem to be such

There are at least dozens of articles documenting the isolation, purification and identification of SARS-CoV-2, published in the leading peer-reviewed journals. Just google isolating SARS-CoV-2 virus

[DavidOdden]

15 hours ago, EC said:

This is a ridiculous thread. My own grandfather died of COVID and I know plenty of people that have had it. It exists.

I got something about 16 months ago: mostly a persistent sore throat like strep (without the blotches). My wife was also feeling crappy, then she hollers down to me that she had covid, I took the test again and the test device showed lines. I infer that I had covid, but I don’t “know, with certainty” that I did. The main question, then, was “what should I do?”. I decided to take the benevolent path and not risk transmitting it to others for the requisite time, and just waited to get over it. The alternative would be to assume that I don’t have any bio-disease, so maybe I would go shopping or partying, or something.

In other words, when you don’t know “for absolute positive certain” what the correct conclusion is, you have to carefully weigh risks and the quality of knowledge that you have. My direct knowledge was pretty minimal, everything that I know about covid is second to third hand (I don’t classify “common knowledge” as “knowledge”, and gen-pop health services announcements are also not “knowledge”, they are social-management strategies). Mask facts and distancing facts were prime examples of ideologically-engineered conclusion which had a mild relation to scientific fact. The 6’ figure was derived from standards applied to doctors, a number for reducing chances of getting whatever the patient was emitting (20’ closer to the Truly Safe distance, also completely impractical for ordinary human interaction). I decided to read a couple of serious (paywall) articles when the plague first happened, and like everything else in medicine (and science in general), I found multiple tiers of information.

Popular media and politicians rely on the lowest level of pseudo-information, the executive summary. This is strictly a series of conclusions and recommendations, and no evidence – the existence of evidence is implied. You can either accept or reject the popular statements, but to do so on a reasoned basis, you have to work hard, ultimately you have to engage the peer-reviewed scientific literature. This goes for covid, lipids, pollution, global warming, species endangerment, homelessness, and every other hot-button political issue. I just don’t have the bandwidth: I’m gonna do what makes sense for me, knowing that death is always possible and fearful death-avoidance isn’t living. Others may prefer to prolong their process of dying, in the mistaken belief that living is “not being dead yet”.

Anyhow, I assume your grandfather had something, which the professionals decided was “covid”, and it isn’t important whether covid is “one thing” or “a class of things”. In terms of declaring what they (the CDC mouthpieces) should have said or done, the one thing that I would fault them for is the huge missed opportunity to elevate the population’s understanding of science. They could have focused more on evidence and logic, rather than the resulting conclusions. The main reason why they did not was that suggestion any possibility of doubt would encourage irrational rejection of conclusions that were not absolutely, definitively and with certitude proven beyond imaginable doubt. Some aspects of this thread are ridiculous, mainly the implied conspiracy theory that nothing actually happened, it was like the staged landings on the moon. Sweeping aside the innuendos and nit-pickings at the lower margins of the science, there are only two important questions. First, was there a disease (or class of…) – can we rationally be Holocaust-deniers about the event? I say no, it happened, details of the disease are of lesser importance. The second question is what the government should have done, and that is pretty obvious at least here: nothing. The function of government is not disease control. But we have been saying this for decades, covid presents nothing new, and IMO losing serious ground in that struggle for hearts and minds.

It is up to the person who cares to find the evidence that objectively (in)validates their conclusions. It would have been nice if the CDC had packaged the science better, but there shouldn’t be an official governmental voice of science in the first place, so applying a “should” to a “shouldn’t” requires you to embrace a contradiction.

[monart]

21 hours ago, EC said:

This is a ridiculous thread. My own grandfather died of COVID and I know plenty of people that have had it. It exists. 

To claim that your grandfather died from covid so "it exists" is circular reasoning, begging the question. The existence, i, e, the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV2 is in doubt because no records of such action has yet been found by FOI (Freedom of Information) government agencies (220 to date) thoughout the world.

[monart]

15 hours ago, AlexL said:

Therefore I urge you to refrain from citing this book as evidence for any claim. It only subverts its credibility.

I don't dismiss the value of a book, especially on this topic, merely from reading the titles and a brief description. For Virus Mania, I read the whole book, with focus on the chapter about Covid-19 and how the authors' investigation shows no evidence that the CoV2 virus has been isolation and purified. For some of the representative papers they analyzed and sought confirmation from the papers' authors that, in fact, they did isolate the virus, the answers were in the negative.

One of the papers, (that your AI bot listed and that I've read myself 3-4 yrs ago and again a few days ago) is the first (or among the first) paper from Communist China, "A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019". One of the authors of the paper, Wenjie Tan, in reply to Virus Mania's authors' request for confirmation of isolation and purification, wrote that they did not and that "(We show] an image of sedimented virus particles, not purified ones".

Also, I note that the paper did not account for other possible (non-microbial) causes for the cases of pneumonia by "unknown causes" that the authors selected for their study. They ignored the long-time pre-existing epidemic of respiratory illness/death caused by the severe air pollution in Wuhan.

The Virus Mania excerpts in my 3rd post explain what isolation and purification must consist of, how difficult and complex the process is, especially for a new virus. So, even if you don't have the book, the excerpts I posted are valuable in helping with the understanding.

The obvious factual question remains: If there exist records that SARS-CoV2 has been isolated, purified, and identified, why have all 220 FOI agencies contacted so far responded with "no records found"? Incompetence? Ignorance? What?

[tadmjones]

9 hours ago, DavidOdden said:

. First, was there a disease (or class of…) – can we rationally be Holocaust-deniers about the event? I say no, it happened, details of the disease are of lesser importance. The second question is what the government should have done, and that is pretty obvious at least here: nothing. The function of government is not disease control. ....

 

I think there is an immediate third step, find the origin and assess the likely-hood of similar 'outbreaks'.

[EC]

3 hours ago, monart said:

To claim that your grandfather died from covid so "it exists" is circular reasoning, begging the question. The existence, i, e, the isolation, purification, and identification of SARS-CoV2 is in doubt because no records of such action has yet been found by FOI (Freedom of Information) government agencies (220 to date) thoughout the world.

No it's not. Is saying that someone died of cancer also "circular reasoning"? It's one thing to accept that the first place COVID was discovered was in Wuhan right in the same city where they were doing experiments with coronavirus's and it escaped from the lab. A high probability but it's quite another thing to arbitrarily claim that a virus that hundreds of millions of people have had or died from "doesn't exist". That's not saying that what is essentially roughly equivalent to the flu was overhyped and obviously governments massively overreacted but to deny a viruses very existence arbitrarily without evidence while there is tons of evidence of its existence is irrational. I won't be participating in this conversation after this comment though.

[DavidOdden]

3 hours ago, monart said:

The obvious factual question remains: If there exist records that SARS-CoV2 has been isolated, purified, and identified, why have all 220 FOI agencies contacted so far responded with "no records found"? Incompetence? Ignorance? What?

Just to get clear on questions of evidence, what is your evidence that all 220 FOI agencies have responded with "no records found", and exactly what record was requested (i.e. your proof that the specific request was made)?

[AlexL]

4 hours ago, monart said:

The obvious factual question remains: If there exist records that SARS-CoV2 has been isolated, purified, and identified, why have all 220 FOI agencies contacted so far responded with "no records found"? Incompetence? Ignorance? What?

There should be thousands of scientific publications about the search for SARS-CoV-2, with varying levels of quality. An identical response of "No record found" from 220 different searches (assuming the lady's account is true😁) should have raised concerns among experienced scientists. This unanimous result suggests that there was not a single scientific publication claiming, albeit falsely, to have correctly identified SARS-CoV-2. This is quite remarkable!

On the other hand, given the claim that the existence of SARS-CoV-2 is a hoax orchestrated by those in power, one would expect to see a near-unanimous "Record found" response.

If I were Christine Massey, M.Sc., I would have felt compelled to investigate the entire process, from the formulation of my query to the search procedures for archival records to the evaluation of the responses. I would have conducted an end-to-end probe, a "calibration test" of sorts. I would have submitted the same query but about another virus whose existence I was certain of, to see if I received predominantly positive responses.

The remarkably unanimous outcome reported by C. Massey could be attributed to the specific wording of her query. For instance, CM's requirements for an acceptable answer may have been internally contradictory or not aligned with established virology practices.

A clue in this direction comes from a comment by one of the respondents to CM's inquiry [see here]:

Quote

The definition of “isolation" provided in the request is outside of what is possible in virology, as viruses need cells to replicate, and cells require liquid food... the SARS-CoV-2 virus may be isolated from a human clinical specimen by culturing in cell culture, which is the definition of “isolation" as used in microbiology...

Indeed, C. Massey's query was phrased as follows:

Quote

Can you please clarify if you have any records of the separation of SARS-COV-2 from everything else (known as isolation and purification)? A simple yes or no will do regarding the answer. Please use the Merriam-Webster dictionary's common definition of isolation I will provide the definitions below <...>

Could the question have been carefully crafted to ensure that the only honest answer was "No records found"? Would a conspiracy-minded individual engage in such tactics? Who can know for sure? 😉

Edited January 31 by AlexL