"Viruses": Tiny Invisible Airborne Killer-Dots. (Really?)

[Joe Hillshoist]

The core point about "isolation" in virology, appears to be that instead of arriving at purity, as with refining a chemical, the process itself introduces more and more foreign biological material, not just from other humans, but from other species, until something is found which relates to prior things found when adding the same kinds of foreign biological material to a sample. A virologist uses the word isolate, but he is actually talking about a process of progressive contamination, the strangest method of isolating or refining anything I've ever heard of.

Can you comment Joe?

They aren't isolating virons/virus particles they are isolating the process of a viral infection. From other potential processes of infection.

So we know its this process not that process...

Viruses don't just sit inertly like some purified chemical. How would they do that?

[Joe Hillshoist]

they kept claiming an infectious piece of genetic material should behave like an inert chemical

No they didn't. Either you're making it up or you never listened to them or you failed to understand what they were saying. If you want todeny this, produce a quote (and a timestamp so I can check it myself). Also: in using the word "infectious" you're begging the question.

I'll never get that hour of my life back. [No Comment] Well closer to two hours cos I went thru and specificallly criticised their points.

Oh did ye, aye?

I was gonna do it again too

Sure you were.
For all your bluster, you make only one concrete claim about the science;

Even after the said it was "never seen" despite the Imaging by Leon Caly's team in Melbourne in Jan 2020 that shows what the virus looks like and the work that team did maps its genome. That the stuff they imaged and sequenced was virus taken from an infectious patient even tho these guys claim its all just stuff someone downloaded.

Of course you give no links or references. So I google Caly's name and arrive at the website of the Doherty Institute. Since you're clearly so well-acquainted with the paper in which Caly et al allegedly did what you tell me they've done, you might have directed me (all of us) to that paper, but never mind. I want to know exactly how this crack team "imaged and sequenced" the KIller Dot and "show[ed] what the virus looks like" and "map[ped] its genome". Sic.

So I carry on searching (don't mention it, my task in life is looking things up for you) and arrive at the website of VIDRL:

our scientists were the first to grow the virus in the laboratory outside of China
https://www.doherty.edu.au/our-work/ins ... r-covid-19

We're getting warmer now. Can't be long till we find out the exact methodology by which Caly's team achieved all these feats. Maybe I'll eventually succeed in identifying and isolating this pathbreaking paper, at long last.

So finally, after some more searching: Bingo -

Abstract:
Isolation [SIC] and rapid sharing of the 2019 novel coronavirus (SARS-CoV-2) from the first patient diagnosed with COVID-19 in Australia
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32237278/

Full paper: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7228321/

And what does it show?

A 58-year-old diabetic former smoker turned up at the hospital with a bad cough. He was also short of breath and running a fever. The scientists (or more likely: the lab technicians) "found" the "virus" -- the virus, just that one, right? No others? No common-cold or familar flu viruses, for instance? -- in the man's snot and spittle (though not in any of his other bodily fluids) by running up to 45 cycles of the fabled PCR "test". The boffins (or much more likely: their bored subordinates) then squirted that gunk onto some frozen monkey-kidney cells, centrifuged the mess, stained the product, embedded it in a resin pellet, sliced the pellet into ultrathin sections, stuck those slices under an electron microscope, bombarded them with electrons, looked at the resultant images, and [cue drumroll]... failed to find what they were looking for.

So then, after racking their brains, they added some other stuff to the mixture, waited a bit, and carefully scrutinised the various shapes shown in their new round of micrographs, until finally -- among all the other bits and pieces those images showed -- Caly and his team spotted something roundish and maybe kind of spiky-looking (depending on how you look at it), and this they proudly dubbed "the virus". Cue fanfare.

Note, though:

1) It may well have been a mere artifact of the whole lengthy, complicated, messy, destructive process;
and
2) Even more fundamentally: At no point did they demonstrate (or question the dogma) that these tiny wee blurry spiky-looking things actually
a) originated outside the man's body and then invaded it, or
b) were the cause of the man's cough or of any of his other symptoms.

So how quickly and easily did they manage to "find" these wee blurry spiky-looking things, these Flying Killer Dots?

Following several failures to recover virions with the characteristic fringe of surface spike proteins, it was found that adding trypsin to the cell culture medium immediately improved virion morphology.

Well, it would, wouldn't it! Adding a digestive enzyme to the cell culture might be expected to corrode some of those cells, altering their form and making them look a bit raggedy round the edges, just as adding live piranhas to your bathwater will probably have a similar effect on your skin.

I can "find" a zebra by painting stripes on a horse, if I can just get Dobbin to sit still long enough. (And by god I will, I'll show the old nag who's master, I'll whip him till he behaves himself. That's Science.)
.
"We applied standard techniques to isolate the virus" -- indeed they did, and it is precisely the efficacy and reliabilty of these "standard isolation techniques" that is being questioned by Dr Cowan, Dr Kaufman, Dr Lanka and an increasing number of other doctors and scientists. In what way can these "standard isolation techniques" truly be said to isolate anything, much less prove either the invasiveness or the pathogenicity of the thing so "isolated" (sic)?

But this is December 2021, and Anything Goes. If commonly-understood terms such as "case" and "vaccine" and "pandemic" can be redefined at will by the WHO or the CDC or the FDA or the RKI or any other bossy but fragile giant egg, then we mere mortals have no reason to be surprised (and no right to object) when everyday words such as "isolate" are also used to "mean" something they demonstrably do not mean to anyone except the Masters of Virology, those infallible, incorruptible and omniscient Gods in White.

“When I use a word,” Humpty Virumpty said in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
“The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
“The question is,” said Humpty Virumpty, “which is to be master—that's all.”

https://www.thoughtco.com/humpty-dumpty ... ge-2670315

Do you record yourself saying this stuff then listen back to it?

[Joe Hillshoist]

Of course you give no links or references. So I google Caly's name and arrive at the website of the Doherty Institute.

Yeah, not that fucken hard is it. Maybe you need to spend of your life finding stuff for yourself without someone holding your hand. I just assumed you'd know who the Doherty Institute are and who Peter Doherty is. Being an expert on their mistakes and all.

You don't need to look it up for me. I've read it.

And I couldn't give a fuck one way or the other whether you read it or not. You've never once argued in good faith about this situation so why would I bother chasing it up for you? You got stuck into Operator Kos cos they dared disagree with your world view 18 months ago (you cunt) cos they had the temerity to work in a hospital and see things that challenged your worldview. As if you're gonna read a scientific paper with an open mind or make the effort to understand what its describing.

So then, after racking their brains, they added some other stuff to the mixture, waited a bit, and carefully scrutinised the various shapes shown in their new round of micrographs, until finally -- among all the other bits and pieces those images showed -- Caly and his team spotted something roundish and maybe kind of spiky-looking (depending on how you look at it), and this they proudly dubbed "the virus". Cue fanfare.

Note, though:

1) It may well have been a mere artifact of the whole lengthy, complicated, messy, destructive process;

Here is the thing. If its just an artifact of the "whole messy process" why does it change the monkey cell mess over time compared to the control group? Why is there more of it days later when the process ended than when they put all that stuff together? Why has it grown? Shouldn't the sample not change if its just messy dead cell detritus and other contaminants? Instead stuff appears afterward and increases in number over time.

this implies something is growing and feeding off the mess.

The group of monkey cells and other crap without the virus samples does nothing. There are photos of it doing nothing in the paper you reckon you read after working so hard to find it. Why is it that adding cell detritus and what have you destroys that stuff over time when its all just dead shit already? Its broken down cos there is a process that is started by adding infectious material. But the control cell group doesn't change.

Or did you miss that?

Something something PCR tests over 45 cycles.

Cept they weren't over 45 were they. They were all around 30 cycles at their lowest which is a much more reliable test result. In fact none of those results show 45 cycles. The lowest levels of virus were detected around 40 cycles, as the infection (there is that word again) waned.

You can see that in the graph. It drops to 30 (which is accurate reading not a result of contamination or random shit floating by.) As the virus moves from the nasalpharangeal cavity into the lungs and other systems the PCR test cycle rate drifts toward 40 in the N/P cavity and drops toward 30 in the lung sputum. As you'd expect if the rate of production of the virus in the N/P cavity. AS the cycles increase the viral load is shown to be dropping but the higher cycle tests don't happen in isolation, they follow on from low cycle tests of the same material earlier in the ... (wait for it) ... infection.

You're not even processing this info properly, you're looking for little unrelated of data to confirm your bias - that is all you need. Like the number 45 on a graph with PCR test results, even tho none of the graph points are near 45.

[DrEvil]

Yeah, well, you can prove anything with facts and logic.

[conniption]

https://twitter.com/denisrancourt

[Harvey]

Yeah, well, you can prove anything with facts and logic.

As though you understand the process of deliberately killing cells to prove the existence of a pathogen (Look, the cells died! There must be a virus!) any better than Joe apparently does. Good faith indeed.

[DrEvil]

And you do? None of us are experts on the subject. It's easy enough to read something and think you understand it, but without a deeper understanding of the subject you simply don't know the things you don't know. Something that looks dodgy at first glance can have a perfectly simple explanation that you just aren't aware of.

[Harvey]

That's a far more reasonable response and of course, I agree.

[MacCruiskeen]

Dr Dr I.M. Evil, Professor of Goodthinking and Shiftiness at Imperial Collapse London, continues to demonstrate his inability or prudent reluctance to address any argument on its merits.

So if it's top-notch science, A-1 morals, and impeccable logic we're seeking, let us attend instead to his esteemed colleague and collaborator, Dr Josef Bigg-Kock*, Senior Lecturer in Swearing at the University of Coober Pedy.

Dr Bigg-Kock's Postulates:

1. Guzzle a coupla tinnies and siphon the python on a bag of spuds, add a kilo of monkey-kidneys and a jar of purified yeast (tho I spose vegimite'll do if you're stuck), top it all off with some mushroom spores and a bucketful of maggots, and leave this preparation to marinate outdoors in 40°C heat for a week. (Don't worry if a wallaby shits on it.)

2. After seven days, walk steadily out of the pub and examine the pile carefully: you will observe no changes in its appearance, texture or volume, unless you've remembered where you left your specs.

3. But if any of youse wankers try to eat it, I can tell you from painful first-hand experience you'll be yawning in fucken technicolour double quick thanks to them little bastard Killer Dots.

4. Therefore: VIRUSES FUCKEN EXIST.

http://www.en.OutbackBarAndGrill.com/VirologyExplained

.

That's TheScience™, for heaven's sake. Follow it. Show it some gosh-darned respect.

People are dying, you know.

*Dr Bigg-Kock is an Honorary Fellow of the Fauci Institute and author of the self-published monographs, Me And My Mates Could Beat Youse Fucken Pencilnecks To A Pulp: A Defence of the Scientific Method. (17pp, Coober Pedy Books, 2021) and How To Light A Fart Safely (1p, Burns Unit Dispatches, 2003).

[Harvey]

*Dr Bigg-Kock is an Honorary Fellow of the Fauci Institute and author of the self-published monographs, Me And My Mates Could Beat Youse Fucken Pencilnecks To A Pulp: A Defence of the Scientific Method. (17pp, Coober Pedy Books, 2021) and How To Light A Fart Safely (1p, Burns Unit Dispatches, 2003).

God, it's been boring without you!

[Belligerent Savant]

.
Yes. Much needed.

How else to endure madness than with sharp satire?

Especially when the real world plays like a far-fetched parody.

[maple syrup]

Y'all do understand that viruses are not your average wee particle, yes? Funny thing about them, is that they display no real link to other living things. They are, in effect dead. That is the major crux of the book and the rest of those who use that to claim viruses do not exist. Yet, they do.

Think of it this way. Can you see an atom of lead? Is lead alive? Yet, if you consume enough in a solution, you die....

[MacCruiskeen]

Y'all do understand that viruses are not your average wee particle, yes? Funny thing about them, is that they display no real link to other living things. They are, in effect dead. That is the major crux of the book and the rest of those who use that to claim viruses do not exist. Yet, they do.

Think of it this way. Can you see an atom of lead? Is lead alive? Yet, if you consume enough in a solution, you die....

Think of it this way. Can you see an atom? A gerbil is made of atoms. Some gerbils are in effect dead. Yet when I swallowed a dead gerbil I developed severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS), lost consciousness within seconds, and had a sore throat for weeks after the tracheotomy. Therefore, a gerbil is a virus.

#FollowTheScience #ZeroGerbil

[maple syrup]

At least I chuckled. However the reply is not analogous. You can not use logic and go from, "[a] gerbil is made of atoms," to, "[s]ome gerbils are in effect dead. Nor can you claim to be factual.

If viruses are not the cause of that which has been attributed to viruses, what does?

Should we also be in doubt of bacteria?

[Joe Hillshoist]

Dr Dr I.M. Evil, Professor of Goodthinking and Shiftiness at Imperial Collapse London, continues to demonstrate his inability or prudent reluctance to address any argument on its merits.

So if it's top-notch science, A-1 morals, and impeccable logic we're seeking, let us attend instead to his esteemed colleague and collaborator, Dr Josef Bigg-Kock*, Senior Lecturer in Swearing at the University of Coober Pedy.

Dr Bigg-Kock's Postulates:

1. Guzzle a coupla tinnies and siphon the python on a bag of spuds, add a kilo of monkey-kidneys and a jar of purified yeast (tho I spose vegimite'll do if you're stuck), top it all off with some mushroom spores and a bucketful of maggots, and leave this preparation to marinate outdoors in 40°C heat for a week. (Don't worry if a wallaby shits on it.)

2. After seven days, walk steadily out of the pub and examine the pile carefully: you will observe no changes in its appearance, texture or volume, unless you've remembered where you left your specs.

3. But if any of youse wankers try to eat it, I can tell you from painful first-hand experience you'll be yawning in fucken technicolour double quick thanks to them little bastard Killer Dots.

4. Therefore: VIRUSES FUCKEN EXIST.

http://www.en.OutbackBarAndGrill.com/VirologyExplained

.

That's TheScience™, for heaven's sake. Follow it. Show it some gosh-darned respect.

People are dying, you know.

*Dr Bigg-Kock is an Honorary Fellow of the Fauci Institute and author of the self-published monographs, Me And My Mates Could Beat Youse Fucken Pencilnecks To A Pulp: A Defence of the Scientific Method. (17pp, Coober Pedy Books, 2021) and How To Light A Fart Safely (1p, Burns Unit Dispatches, 2003).

Because you don't understand what you are reading you are hanging shit on it.