There is a difference between what we know and what we believe. We can only know what we experience. That which has been taken in through our senses, and then recorded in the brain and stored as a memory of an experience. We know what it’s like to eat, to be cold, to feel sad, what rain smells like. We each know our individual life experiences. A man can never know what it’s like to give birth. He can be the most educated, experienced expert, have been involved facilitating thousands of births and spoken with thousands of women about their experiences, but he will never and can never KNOW what it is like. A belief is something that we have accepted as part of our world view and reality, and are assuming to be true, but we don’t know it, as we haven’t experienced it. I believe in an afterlife, although I don’t and can’t and won’t KNOW, until I experience it (or don’t). I believe in extra terrestrials, but I can’t KNOW of their existence unless I experience an encounter. And even then, I would only know I had some sort of experience of an encounter. How could I be sure it wasn’t a trick from a human? I KNOW I am having an experience in a body I call life, but I honestly can’t know anyone else is although I certainly BELIEVE it. Anyways, the point being, is that if we are honest with ourselves, we KNOW very very little, and most of our thoughts, opinions and world-views are beliefs. Therefore it is important to keep an open mind and realize beliefs are not knowing, and beliefs can change. At some point most everyone reading this most likely changed their beliefs around authorities and the system, their education, religion, etc etc… You can’t change knowing. If you have experienced child birth you can never change having gone through that experience and what it was like. You will never be able to un-know having felt sad from a broken heart. The experience remains with you, it can’t be changed. Only your beliefs around it can. So we don’t KNOW what’s going on in the world. We mostly only have our beliefs, and for the most part, everyone believes their beliefs are true. The same is said for the ‘sheep people’. They are convinced that what they believe is fact. They say they know what’s happening because they saw it on the news, where really all they know, is what they experienced, a newscaster telling them a story. They then take that experience, and reference it with their beliefs, a belief that says you find out what’s happening in the world from the news. Then that experience of knowing what the news says, combined with the belief that the news is true, leads to their beliefs and world view of the current events. Same goes for the ‘awake people’, considering their beliefs as fact. We KNOW certain experts with valid credentials are giving a contradictory narrative to the main stream views, yet we can only BELIEVE it is true. We take our experience and knowing of being shown the alternative view, and reference it with our BELIEF that the expert who is shadow banned and censored for speaking out must be telling the truth. Maybe that expert believes what he is saying is true just as many main stream doctors also believe what they are saying is true. What is to say our ‘woke’ beliefs are the absolute truth and not just a slightly more true version of deception? How can we KNOW we are also not being manipulated. What we can KNOW however, is we have experienced many contradictions in the official narrative, many people speaking out about it being censored, lots of our ‘kooky conspiracy theories’ becoming reality etc, which certainly helps reaffirm our beliefs, but still we can’t KNOW the actual and absolute truth without experiencing it. I can’t even imagine how any one person could actually experience everything that is happening. No one person knows everything, or at least that’s my belief. Both narratives of this ‘deadly pandemic’ or ‘NWO power grab’ could have been fabricated for some deeper agenda. We only have our beliefs and know very little.

I certainly believe something is incredibly suspicious, and agree with basically everything on this channel, but I can’t KNOW. We believe there is a shadow group of elites controlling the world, but perhaps we are creating all of this from our collective minds, acting together as architects, externally creating a scenario as that is being feed into our subconscious and conscious minds as truth. By aliens for all we know! So we think we are standing up to oppose it, but by even believing that its a possibility are we are creating it? I don’t KNOW 🤔😂! Anyways just some food for thought, and in my opinion, to keep an open mind means to not be attached to any beliefs.
**A little side note, if anyone is having issues with the definitions I used for ‘knowing’ and ‘belief’, understand words are only sounds which we have assigned value and meaning to. A fork is only a fork because we agree on that sound meaning that object. A fork is actually a tool for eating, regardless of what it is called. It has many names in many languages, but its function doesn’t change no matter what it is called. You can replace ‘knowing’ above with ‘concept 1’ and ‘belief’ with ‘concept 2’. I only used the words to illustrate conceptual ideas. You could also replace them with ‘teekowsta’ and ‘fotawenderasom’. It’s not important the sounds that are used. Just what ideas the sounds are referring to.

Health Freedom for Humanity turned one today! 💚🎈

What a journey!
We are endlessly grateful for the support, love, connections and opportunities that have presented themselves to us over the past year.

The best is yet to come! Thank you for being here. 🙏💚

TICKETS HERE: https://healthfreedomforhumanity.brushfire.com/conference/525542

if you’re in Kansas City or the surrounding area on January 29th, please come join us!

$99 ticket includes:
•6-8 speakers (3:00-7:30)
•Catered Dinner provided by Enjoy Pure Food and Drink
•A DJ, dance party, cash bar, and meet/greet with other local Health Freedom Oriented People (7:30-10:00)

I’m commenting on this here because I’m tired of seeing this everywhere— not everyone who is a believer in germ theory is controlled opposition. That is such a ridiculous notion. Many of them simply have not questioned the foundational evidence for their perceptions.

Episode #56 of the Health Freedom for Humanity podcast is now live!

Follow this link to listen or watch:

https://www.flowcode.com/page/healthfreedomforhumanity

In this episode, Dr. Jess and Alec meet with Researchers and Authors Dawn Lester and David Parker for the first of a multi-part series. Dawn and David spent over 10 years writing and researching their book, What Really Makes You Ill? which extensively covers all things related to the true nature of health and disease.

For more information on Dawn and David, please visit:
https://whatreallymakesyouill.com/

To donate to Health Freedom for Humanity please visit: https://healthfreedomforhumanity.org/donate/

I’ll let you all find all of the logical fallacies/misrepresentations/lack of understanding of the scientific method in Mercola’s article where he “debunks” the no virus issue.

Here is my response to Mercola’s article (1/2):

First, I would like to start with this— appeals to authority are not scientific evidence. Because “insert expert says so” is not evidence. Logical fallacies do not take the place of scientific evidence that strictly adheres to the scientific method. I don’t care about your credentials— evidence that adheres to the scientific method is what matters.

When I ask for *one* paper in which a virus was isolated, purified, characterized, and sequenced directly from the fluids of sick host and not as a result of a cell culture, understand I’m asking for foundational evidence for the existence of a virus.

Virolgists presuppose that there is a virus present in the fluids that are presented to the cell culture (alongside DMEM, fetal bovine serum, amphotericin/gentamicin, etc.), and assume that the virus in the snot is causing the cell to experience the cytopathic effect.

They have never established that a virus is present inside the fluids of a sick host, first, and second, have never taken said virus from the fluids and presented it to a healthy host to see if it causes disease.

Every electron micrograph image of what virologists refer to as a virus is a result of a cell culture experiment.

When asked to provide one single paper that shows a virus isolated, purified, characterized and sequenced directly from the fluids of a sick host (which they cannot provide), virologists, immunologists, etc. respond with some of the following answers:

1. “The virus is too weak to isolate/purify directly from the fluids.”

Okay… but also you say a virus is able to travel freely through the air, survive on a surface for hours, make it into the body, make it to a cell and break in, hijack the cell’s machinery and begin replicating?

2. “You’re not a virologist, you don’t get to determine what isolation is.”

Okay, but why can’t you provide one piece of foundational evidence to validate your claim that a virus is present in the fluids of a sick host and is the cause of disease?

3. “A virus needs a host in order to replicate, so that’s why we use the cell culture.”

But it *is* in the fluids of a sick person, right? So why can’t it be taken directly from fluids? And how do you know for certain the other cell culture ingredients aren’t causing the CPE? Further, how do you know that a “virus needs a host to replicate” if you’ve never isolated, purified, characterized, and sequenced one directly from the fluids of a sick host? How do you know how one behaves in nature if you haven’t even found it in nature? And what is the human body if not a giant cell culture?

4. “There’s not enough virus present in the fluids to isolated/purify it.”

Excuse me— what? I thought we were talking about a pathogenic disease causing agent that overwhelms the body and produces high “viral loads” in really sick people. Not enough present in the fluids? How many people would it take for there to be “enough virus” present? How can you assign attributes to something you haven’t first shown to exist in nature (in the fluids of a sick host)?

Pseudoscience is anything that doesn’t follow the scientific method but claims to be scientific. Virology has never validated the foundational claim of a pathogenic virus existing inside the fluids of a sick host and has never done control experiments. Virology is pseudoscience.

If you hypothesize “X exists and causes Y”, then you need to show that X exists and directly observe X causing Y.

You can’t say “if X exists, then Y. Y, therefore X exists” if you have never shown that X exists, and seen it causing Y. An affirming the consequent logical fallacy.

The claim is: “a pathogenic virus exists in the fluids of a sick host.” The natural and logical response to that claim is “please provide proof that a pathogenic virus exists in the fluids of a sick host.” That’s what we’re asking for. It is simple, and this evidence has *never* been shown.

Additionally, if everyone in the world understood the implications of this, this whole charade would be over:

Here is my response to Mercola’s article (2/2)

Stefan Lanka, a virologist, has conducted the first ever *proper* control experiments of both virology’s vero cell culture virus isolation experiments and the so-called genomic sequencing of SARS-COV-2— the foundational evidence for all of COVID19.

First, for context, I will explain the procedure used by all virologists to “isolate” a virus.

If you read the methodology of any “SARS-COV-2 virus isolation paper”, you will find that the procedure is as follows:

Minimally filtered snot from a sick host is added to a vero cell culture (monkey kidney cell) alongside cytotoxic antibiotics like gentamicin/amphotericin (usually at 3x normal concentration). They also add “minimal nutrient medium,” which is the minimal amounts of nutrients— DMEM (Dulbecco’s Modified Eagle Medium) and fetal bovine serum— to keep the cell alive. They also sometimes add trypsin. The cell breaks down into a bunch of fragments— called the cytopathic effect. They then stain and heat the fragments to prepare them for electron microscopy, take pictures of them and call them “viruses.”

In phase 1 of Stefan’s control experiment, he followed the exact same procedure except that he did not introduce a sample from a sick host (which virologists presuppose contains the virus, but never validate) to the culture, but used all of the other same ingredients. The exact same cytopathic effect happened, thus proving that the foundational evidence used by virologists to claim the existence of a pathogenic virus is pure pseudoscience.

In phase 2 of the control experiment, Stefan used all of the same ingredients as in the control (antibiotics, minimal nutrient medium, etc.), except that he added yeast to take the place of the snot that supposedly contains the virus and the supposed virus RNA that is uploaded into a computer program to generate a so-called “viral genome.” As Dr. Cowan describes in his recent book, Breaking the Spell, “the reason for adding the yeast RNA is because of the way that the genome of a ‘virus’ is found, a computerized process called ‘alignment.’ The alignment process starts with fragments of RNA and constructs a theoretical genome—one that never exists at any point in the actual sample. This genome never exists in any person, and it never exists intact even in the culture results; it exists only inside the computer, based on an alignment process that arranges these short pieces into an entire ‘genome.’ It is for this reason that every complete genome of SARS-CoV-2 is referred to as an ‘in silico’ genome, meaning a genome that exists only in the computer. As long as you have enough of these RNA fragments and provide the template, the computer can recreate any genome.”

Stefan was able to recreate 100% of the so-called SARS-Cov-2 genome without any clinical sample from a sick person present, but rather a random sample of yeast.

Could there be a pathogenic disease causing virus? Absolutely. Has the existence of one been scientifically established? No. The evidence is severely lacking at best and completely pseudoscientific and fraudulent at worst, especially given we’ve flipped the entire world upside down over it.

I’m sorry, but “This is the new definition of isolation only used by virologists because virologists are experts and they say so” does not equate to science, nor does it prove “virus.”

This thread 😳 https://twitter.com/jamesfwells/status/1483172821404729348?s=21

Christine here. I’ll be hosting a voice chat again tomorrow, Jan 18th at 3pm Pacific, 5pm Central, 6pm Eastern or whatever time it converts to in your time zone. For those who haven’t attended one before they’re an informal chance to say hi, connect, acknowledge where we’re at and explore whatever topics or themes feels most relevant for us. The banner at the top of the channel shows the countdown to it and you can click on that banner at the time of to join. Looking forward to it.

Discernment. Cleverly crafted disinformation that seems to be “exposing corruption” but is simply perpetuating the narrative in a different way for future scenarios. As Dr. Sam Bailey has stated, “just because it was written down on paper doesn’t mean it’s true or biologically possible.” Also, as she states, content on GOF seems to be promoted while content on lack of proof of viruses is scrubbed from the internet… hmmm….
Did something happen in a lab? Yes, I do believe so. Was a “bio-weapon” created in a lab? Yes, I do believe so. But it wasn’t a 🦠, it was the shot.