WATCH: Naming Names and Connecting Dots in the Globalist Agenda
So, you want someone to name names, cite documents and expose the facts about the decades-long globalist takeover? Then you’ve come to the right place!
Join James Corbett for this edition of The Corbett Report where he breaks down Dr. Meryl Nass’ presentation to the International Crisis Summit in Tokyo and provides context and further reading about the cadre of elitists who are attempting to take control of the planet and its resources.
For sources, download options and a full transcript click HERE.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
An interesting titbit, if it’s true:
https://www.historyhit.com/hitlers-illnesses-was-the-fuhrer-a-drug-addict/
Might explain, but not excuse, the aberrant behaviour of our current crop of Fuhrer$$$$$$$$$.
At night Hitler used to meet non physical entities in out of body experiences. The greatest one (in his biased eyes) told him what to do military, and spoke through him in his mass (hypnosis) speeches in daytime. Occultism without Soul compass = black.
I’ve lost count of the number of afflictions Hitler is said to have had,
according to Experts, and they’re never wrong, because they’re Experts…
They have all been to Epstein’s Island and have starred in many movie productions and photo sessions. Drinking the children’s blood, etc.
Good overview anglo globalist imperialism. Most know to me, but not that John Rockefeller Jr. had kept the UN headquarter in the US.
When the United Nations was created in 1945, after the trauma of World War II, it lacked a home. The organization initially met in cramped quarters at Manhattan’s Hunter College and on Long Island. The inadequate arrangements forced the new body to look for permanent accommodations in other cities or overseas. Switzerland was a possibility. Hours before a final decision was due, John Rockefeller Jr. swooped in with an irresistible offer: He would buy 17 acres along the East River in Manhattan and donate it to the international organization. The U.N. quickly accepted the multimillion-dollar gift
Like most modern philanthropists, John Rockefeller managed to get complete tax exemption for his UN intervention: in other words all actual tax payers in the US footed his “donation” bill. Philandering really.
I was hoping for some global boiling this year, instead all I got were minions blocking out the Sun 😐
MSM headlines and Reality are not the same thing,
and, it seems, ‘never the twain shall meet ?’
Whilst the Lie most of the time, I think it highly probable that they are telling the Truth about Alex Salmond now Dead
they will meet on the twains heading towards the stockyards…
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_educated_at_Haileybury_and_Imperial_Service_College
Maybe I’m late to the show and everyone already knows this…?
The name rather says it all. They also have schools in Kazakhstan where only English is spoken. How remarkable that the Great Game persists but the ‘enemy’ has been co-opted.
Firstly, I have not yet watched the video because as soon as “Researcher” commented that it was a UN front, my antennae rose. I checked his link. Whilst doing some unconnected research this morning, I found that a Sir Henry MacMahon (the diplomat behind the 1916 Sykes-Picot Agreement dividing up the Ottoman Empire) had gone to school at the East India company school in England which opened in 1806 and changed its name in 1856 after the Indian Mutiny. It became Haileybury College (I will post a link in my next comment) which produced imperialists such as Erskine Childers and Rudyard Kipling etc. It is now a “Model UN” (MUN) school of which there are many (4 here in NZ which have produced 3,000 future leaders all brain-washed UN champions spouting climate change etc. It makes sense to indoctrinate the long but I didn’t know it was so blatant. The plot thickens…
Instead of the school of ‘hard knocks’ they attend the school of Truth Blocked.
Connect the dots as much as you like, and all you will end up with is a multi-gruesome collage of evil demons trying to kill is all – Not Nice.
Whilst we did get married in Gretna Green – English runaways, we didn’t care one way or the other if the people of Scotland wanted to be Independent…
So at the time, I went round our local music pub in London, asking what people thought (which included many people(including the band) originally from Scotland
80% said Scotland can Fxck Off… If they don’t like us English fine
Have your Scottish Independence – we don’t care either way.
So we were on this island in the Med about 10 years ago..about 10 people chatting round the table, about everything and nothing. 8 were Scottish. My wife and I Lancashire (English), after the gig late at night – we were all a bit drunk, and I thought of the only Scottish Senior Politician I could think of – knowing nothing about her Nicola Sturgeon
The entire table went Silent – my wife dug me in the ribs tried to stamp on my right foot to shtfu
They had no problem with us English – just seriously Disliked Nicola Sturgeon – working for the Globalist WEF even then?
RIP Alex Salmond Dead at 69. Though I never met him, I could tell that he was a Decent and Honorable Man of Integrity – extremely rare of politicians today
I am also convinced that The Scottish voted for Independence but the result was rigged.
I watched the vote counters live – I saw them cheating
Lol. International Crisis Summit? That’s a UN front.
Meryl Nass believes in the anthrax hoax, germ theory, viruses and other continually debunked non-sense.
So who believes the debunk?
Anyone who can read a research paper and knows the scientific method.
There’s zero scientific evidence for any of those frauds.
So what’s with your Nazi medal avatar?
There is plenty of evidence for germ theory, just no proof, which is why it’s a theory not a law. It’s still probably the best theory we have for all that. Terrain theory is no better, in fact worse in many ways since it often defies the principle of parsimony.
Virus theory is more debatable. But even so the general concept of transmission and infection correlate extremely well with observation even if the exact method is not well understood. Again, there’s no competing theory that does much better, though there’s probably a great deal we don’t know about very complex interactions.
Btw a poor scientific theory isn’t automatically a hoax. Group think, confirmation bias, institutional bias, suspicion of new thinking, all contrive to permit people to bend the facts to keep supporting an outdated idea.
Show us your evidence. Why have 120+ years of attempts to cause transmission of disease failed? Why did the Common Cold Research Unit in the UK shut down in 1989 after 42 years of attempting to demonstrate transmission of cold? (Can You Catch a Cold? by Daniel Roytas, 2024).
Let’s not be adversarial about this, or overly polarised. Let’s keep it academic. Better discussion that way.
And let’s differentiate between virus theory (rather weak) and bacteria (definitely exist).
So, let’s talk about bacteria. They exist. Can be cultured. Can be killed. Their association with certain disease processes is well established, though not their precise role in that process. The fact antibiotics can combat those disease processes and also kill the bacteria is well established.
The fact we can’t replicate or fully explain the role of bacteria doesn’t mean we can afford to ignore what we do know.
Certain bacteria are associated with developing certain diseases or pathologies. Kill the bacteria, and the disease/pathology is also halted. Empirical observation tells us this is true even though we don’t know the entire mechanism and can’t necessarily replicate it.
More to understand? Sure, but don’t discard what we do know simply because we don’t yet have a full picture.
Is there ossified, unhelpful, bigoted thinking in the field? Of course there is, there always is, still not a reason to throw out centuries of acquired empirical knowledge.
Now, viruses. Tricky. The fact people get sick when exposed to other sick people has been an empirical fact for centuries – longer.
Some of that can be explained by some process involving bacteria. But other diseases manifest that have no observable connection with bacteria.
Another “transmission” process seems to be involved. Viruses have been postulated as that means.
It’s a plausible hypothesis that may be true or partly true, but which has become prematurely accepted as “the truth”.
We evidently know so little about why people get sick when exposed to other sick people and so many potential variables make replication in living creatures almost impossible.
Transmission of ‘viral disease’ is an empirically observed reality. We KNOW this. No one will develop measles without being in contact with someone who also has measles or has been in proximity to someone with measles.
This is true even if viruses turn out not to be the means of transmission. That just means something else is doing the transmitting and we need to keep researching.
Terrain theory requires us to throw out all our empirical observation and innate knowledge for a theory that is no better supported evidentially than virus theory. In fact it’s less well supported because it denies empirical observation and only offers hypotheticals in its place.
Surely a better scientific explanation would – blame ‘God’,
you know, He Who Works In Mysterious Ways. (Not to be
confused with The Ghost Who Walks – The Phantom !_
No, invoking God is unscientific because, like terrain theory it is unfalsifiable. Like terrain theory It merely is imposed as the endpoint reason why our observations don’t count.
Or one could replace observations with actions too, leaving it up to the gods to resolve their own problems w/o help from mere mortals.
Lets wish them good luck too.
Show us any bacteria which have been proven to be pathogens in procedures which satisfy all 4 of Koch’s Postulates. Not even Koch managed that.
If transmission is an observed reality, how come 120+ years of attempts to create transmission failed? Does it only happen when people are not watching? 😂
Why did Milton Rosenau, the US Navy’s top doctor, fail to create a single transmission of the “Spanish” Flu, history’s allegedly most infectious disease? He even wrote about this in JAMA.
So if you or your loved ones contract a disease like gonorrhoea, meningitis or tuberculosis I assume you’ll be refusing/discouraging the use of antibiotics, in that case?
Your proof that any of these are caused by pathogens is….?
Your deflection demonstrates I checkmated you
There’s that word proof again. Not applicable in science, as I hope you now understand.
The shortcomings of the postulates are interesting, and they show we have a lot to learn about the method of transmission, which may well be a lot more subtle and complicated than we know.
But there is a great deal of empirical data a) showing that proximity to certain diseases increases the chance of developing the disease and b)demonstrating that killing certain bacteria can halt a disease process associated with that bacteria.
The mere fact killing the bacteria can end the disease process is enough to nullify the hypothesis that all bacteria are harmless or beneficial. The mere fact antibiotics save lives every day is adequate demonstration that some bacteria are associated with morbidity and disease.
yikes Bernard, Rockefeller much…?
What is “Rockefeller”?
Is it “Rockefeller” to point out that some type of transmission vector for disease has been empirically observed for centuries?
Is it “Rockefeller” to say virology is full of holes but may have some points in its favor?
Are you taking part in a rational discussion or merely crying “heresy”?
False. For thousands of years the Chinese and East Indians used Ayurveda and Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM) and neither of these cultures acknowledged or observed “contagion” or “transmission”.
And both countries have the largest populaces. Not a coincidence.
Moreover, contagionism and germ theory is really a late 19thC grift/fraud/con.
Anticontagionism was the dominant (and correct) belief for countless centuries before the frauds of Koch and Pasteur, and the Hygiene movement/eugenics.
Has it occurred to you that perhaps the belief system itself is the only thing which gives any medicine effectiveness? The ‘placebo’ effect is universally acknowledged, swept under the rug with other ‘psychological’ phenomenon like hypnosis and dreams. Are you open minded enough to consider this, or are you just a different breed of fanatic pedalling false certainty?
Is terrain scientifically demonstrated? We both know, despite your obligatory special pleading, the answer is NO.
That’s a Killer argument !
If something hasnt been demonstrated scientifically
then it’s not scientific…
or: What Science hasnt an explanation for must be
unscientific…
Repressive Rationalism is wot that is !
Yes, that’s how it works. Science requires a certain rigor and it needs data that can be analysed. If there is no data then there is nothing to analyse scientifically
No! Very poor logic. Your second statement is in no way syllogisitcally connected to your first. On the contrary, any unexplained phenomenon has the potential to be explored scientifically provided there is data capable of analysis.
Terrain theory is merely an attempt to provide a reason to ignore the empirical observation of disease transmission. It says simply that even if disease transmission seems to be observed it’s merely coincidental because a group of individuals have begun “detoxing” at the same time.
I’m not aware of any hypothesis or studies on the nature of this detoxing, or if the hypothesis has been tested by experiment. Maybe one of the resident proponents of the idea can tell us.
Indeed, let’s see. I’ve enjoyed your posts on this.
concept of transmission and infection correlate extremely well with observation
LOL
If the experiment to “infect” people with Spanish Flu conducted for the Public Health Service and the U.S. Navy by Milton Rosenau in 1918-19 and which failed to infect anyone worked “extremely well”, I’d like to see a failure!
How interesting that Rosenau’s work here is completely missing from his Wikipedia page:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milton_J._Rosenau
Wikipedia: all the information that’s fit to know.
Can you provide more info about Rosenau’s failed attempts – sounds interesting
Easy search. Rosenau’s experiments were published in JAMA in 1919. Flu term came from influenza came from “influence of the heavens”.
The ‘Spanish Flu’ is pretty dubious. But what about colds? What about the normal flu? Those have been around a lot longer than the Rockefellers.
So we’re honestly reasoning, as intelligent laymen, that everything since these initial no-shows is just hogwash and some sort of mass delusion/conspiracy?
There are conspiracies and there are conspiracies. Just checking the consensus here.
Why LOL? The mere fact certain diseases occur in clusters is empirical evidence that correlates with transmission. Or are you actually denying this centuries old observation?
If one child gets pink eye it becomes more likely any other child in proximity to that child will also get pink eye, and the closer the proximity the more likely that becomes.
The fact that not every child will be affected doesn’t change the fact their chance of getting pink eye increases once they are in contact with someone who has it.
That is empirical observation consistent with transmission, you see
We SEE observation consistent with transmission every time there is an outbreak of seasonal flu or gastroenteritis in a workplace or a school.
The fact not everyone in the workplace or school will get flu or gastroenteritis doesn’t change the fact their chance of getting these diseases increases once they are in proximity with someone who already has it.
Transmission by some agent is clearly implied. Otherwise why would being in contact with a sick person make you more likely to get sick
Terrain theory is irrational because it tries to reject this empirical observation and replace it with an unfalsifiable hypothesis.
It basically says “yes, it might look like transmission is happening but that is just because all the people in that school began de-toxing at the same time due to poorly understood environmental factors.”
It explains nothing of what is observed, merely offers a hypothetical reason why our observations should be ignored.
That is not good science.
While there is much to question in virus theory, transmission by some agency remains a well supported empirical observation.
Dismissing empirical observation in favor of hypothesis is fundamentally irrational and should NEVER be done.
Pretty much the basis of most ‘Conspiracy Theories’ ?
Incorrect. The scientific evidence actually refutes these false “beliefs” of yours.
Virology replaced toxicology. A fraud versus a real science.
I suggest you educate yourself with the books on the links below that I left in reply to you and Ian. Return when you know something. Your comments reveal profound ignorance.
Please stop asserting your ‘truth’ as ultimate, please. This link is clearly not empirical proof or very scientific, therefore we must assume you’re biased by your own beliefs.
We must be skeptical and weigh the available evidence, otherwise we’re proselytising and propagandising. A2
Terrain Theory, often embraced by fringe groups and conspiracy theorists, claims that all diseases are caused by an internal imbalance in the body’s “terrain,” rejecting the existence of viruses, bacteria, and other pathogens. This theory is riddled with absurdities and plot holes, reflecting a pseudo-scientific hoax concocted by illiterate individuals looking to form a cult of gullible followers.
Firstly, the foundational claim that viruses and bacteria don’t exist is not only laughably false, but it also flies in the face of centuries of established scientific evidence. These pathogens have been directly observed, isolated, and identified through methods like electron microscopy and genetic sequencing. If viruses didn’t exist, how do proponents of Terrain Theory explain the successful eradication of diseases like smallpox, which was achieved through targeted vaccination based on the understanding of viral infection? These are not spontaneous cures from “balancing the terrain” but results of modern science at work.
Furthermore, Terrain Theory requires us to believe that external infections play no role in diseases, even though there is overwhelming evidence from history that contagions spread. Take, for example, the Black Death or the 1918 Spanish Flu pandemic—how does Terrain Theory explain the fact that individuals in close contact with infected people were more likely to fall ill? According to their logic, the “internal imbalance” of all those individuals must have coincidentally happened at the same time—a truly ridiculous notion.
The theory also implies that sanitary practices, antibiotics, and vaccines, which have undeniably saved millions of lives, are irrelevant. This is the same kind of dangerous denialism that leads to preventable deaths from easily treatable conditions. Why would people’s “terrain” suddenly improve once we discovered antibiotics? Why do people no longer die en masse from bacterial infections like they did before these treatments existed?
The larger problem with Terrain Theory is that it presents itself as a one-size-fits-all explanation for disease, while ignoring the mountain of evidence supporting the germ theory of disease. This theory is the foundation of all modern medicine, and its predictive power has been validated countless times. From Pasteur’s experiments to today’s advanced immunology, the germ theory explains the mechanisms of infection, prevention, and treatment with a precision and effectiveness that Terrain Theory can only dream of.
In reality, Terrain Theory is nothing more than a fantasy, sustained by those who either misunderstand basic biology or willingly reject scientific evidence. It’s a hoax, perpetuated by opportunists who thrive on the adulation of the uninformed. There’s a reason no legitimate doctor, scientist, or health organization subscribes to this nonsense—it’s a theory that belongs in the annals of disproven quackery, right alongside flat Earth claims and phrenology.
The only people who benefit from Terrain Theory are the ones selling miracle cures, detox kits, and holistic remedies, preying on the fears and ignorance of their followers. The theory has zero evidence, zero credibility, and zero place in modern discourse. It’s not just wrong; it’s dangerous. Reject it, and instead, trust the centuries of evidence-based medicine that have consistently improved human health and longevity.
yeah, lifespans are increasing, as are birthrates, according to all reports (from morgues to maternity wards, in the North, the East, the West and South) I’m not into phrenology, personally- though I don’t discount the hidden & particular benefits certain parties might accrue due to the current trend of skull-binding.
that said –
physiognomy, as a gut science presents an altogether appealing alternative for ‘the man on the street’…
You are partially correct, but like our friend Jeffrey, too adversarial and extreme.
There are holes in our understanding of how bacteria create disease, and it’s fair to point those out. There are even bigger holes in viral theory, which do deserve to be exposed. The field has forgotten it’s virus theory , not virus law. There are few firm answers and much that is tenuous or even quite false being passed off as ‘fact’..
However the terrain theory lobby just goes way too far in dumping empirical observation and research.
Firstly they conflate virus theory and bacterial infection into one and call it “germ theory”.
Terrible method and deeply misleading. The role of bacteria in causing disease is well observed if not fully explained or replicable. Antibiotics work to cure certain disease processes by killing bacteria associated with that process. Ergo we have empirical observation that certain bacteria play a role in creating certain diseases.
It makes no sense to throw that out simply because we can’t explain exactly what that process is or necessarily replicate it. It makes even less sense to replace this empirical knowledge with “terrain theory” which has far LESS data to support it!
Virology is a different and much less robustly supported game, which is why conflating it with bacteriology is so misleading and such poor sloppy method.
Like I said critiquing the big holes in virology is valid, and probably overdue. But again the terrain theory crowd go way too far and throw out centuries of empirical observation about transmission and replace it with a theory that has no empirical support and merely “explains away” the empirical observation of transmission as illusory.
Rational, non-adversarial thinking is desperately needed and in very short supply on this subject.
Antibiotics dont discriminate – they kill all bacteria. the bacteria
that you, your health depend on… Your bacteria are like symbiots,
you cant live without them…
Next time you take an aspirin with a glass of water for a headache,
and the headache is relieved, was it the tar-chemical derived drug, or
the glass of water that relieved your headache… “Empirically” – a word
that’s thrown around with abandon, – might suggest the headache
may be an indication you were de-hydrated, and the glass of water
relieved the headache… Some headaches are a symptom of dehydration…
By the way, the ‘no virus has ever yet been isolated / purified’ mob,
consider bacteria as friends, garbage collectors who clean up damaged
and rotting tissue etc… But you would have to read their stuff to learn
that…
Correct, antibiotics don’t discriminate, which is a disadvantage, though some are more narrow spectrum than others. But the point is THEY WORK to control or eradicate certain pathologies and apparently do so by killing the bacteria associated with the pathology.
This is good evidence that certain bacteria are directly involved in propagating certain pathologies or disease processes.
I’m aware of the “all bacteria are good” claims, which tend to be aggressively asserted in contradiction of empirical observation and are for the most part unfalsifiable and therefore unscientific.
Re. aspirin – is analgesia now being questioned? Because we understand a great deal about how that works. Aspirin is a painkiller and NSAID that blocks certain processes in the body that cause inflammation.
Sure dehydration causes headaches and drinking water is a great cure, but aspirin will kill the pain while you wait for the water to work
There’s no scientific evidence for germ theory, there’s never been.
There’s no scientific evidence for contagion.
There’s no scientific evidence for viral existence or causation of dis-ease.
Bacteria can’t cause dis-ease, they are merely a result of toxin exposure (including EMF and radiation), malnutrition and/or tissue damage.
As for viruses, no virus has ever been found, isolated or purified or shown to cause any illness.
Koch’s postulates has never been met for the unfound virions or for bacteria.
All the so-called pathogens aren’t pathogenic. Moreover they aren’t exogenous.
Bacteria can’t cause illness in their pure form, as Pettenkofer and Metchnikoff both demonstrated when they drank Vibrio cholerae and didn’t become ill.
And alleged pathogens can’t be transmitted between people, not through body fluids or sneezing or coughing. The experiments have been done that refute this theory, ergo it’s been continually disproven.
Bacteria aren’t exogenous pathogens, rather they are all endogenous, pleomorphic and are manufactured in the blood and the cell during the recycling and detoxification processes.
Whoa slow down Researcher!
Firstly, PLEASE let’s draw a proper distinction between bacteria and viruses. They are not interchangeable terms. If you insist on conflating them we can’t have a meaningful conversation and I will have to withdraw.
Secondly none of your sources are scientific analyses. The first is barely scientifically literate. Like you she recklessly conflates viruses and germs as if she has no idea of the vast differences in them and in the state of our understanding of them.
Please not crucially though her use of the term “proof” or “definitive proof”. This is either very disingenuous or very ignorant.
She is of course technically correct. Definitive proof that a given bacterium caused a given pathology does not exist.
But what she fails to add, either through malfeasance or ignorance is that definitive proof, in a scientific sense, is almost impossible to achieve under any circumstances.
Science does not expect or demand definitive proof of anything.
Science does not work that way.
In science a thing become accepted as a theory or a law when continued experiment has failed to disprove it.
That certain bacteria have some type of causal association with certain disease has been demonstrated repeatedly beyond the usual standard deviations required to eliminate chance.
And most recently we have the added data that antibiotics kill bacteria and in so doing will oftentimes also cure a disease process associated with the bacteria.
This is very robust evidence of causal connection that has never been refuted or supplanted by a superior hypothesis that better fits the evidence.
Dawn is correct that the causal connection has not been proved. But, as I have shown, she is also being deeply deceptive, because science would never expect it to be proved in the way she describes.
In fact it could not be proved in a scientific sense since almost nothing can be.
She is either woefully ignorant of the scientific method or preying on the ignorance of her readers.
Either way it’s very substandard and highly misleading.
The other two links seem to at least confine themselves to dealing with virology, which is an improvement. I’m familiar with the argument against viruses as disease vectors and some do make sense.
But Researcher, your certitude is WAY in advance of anything justifiable. Your claims that bacteria are harmless simply flies in the face of years of empirical research and is based solely on allowing Ms Dawn and others to hoodwink you with their disingenuous usage of the “definitively proved” diversion.
The certitudes expressed by many virologist are unjustified for sure. The role of so-called virus as transmission vector is far from well established and it remains very possible another better model will be developed in future.
But to leap from that as you do into your own proclamations of vast certitudes is reckless and naive.
Please read more – I suggest scientific publications rather than populist and uninformed stuff like Ms Dawn’s nonsense. It will help you to get out of the maze of confusion you are in.
“Science does not expect or demand definitive proof of anything. “
You obviously do not understand the scientific method. I was trained in science, so please don’t try to snow us.
Really? But you were not taught the fundamental fact that science deals in probabilities not proof? How is that possible? It’s as essential to scientific training as the principle of parsimony! Perhaps these links will help jog your memory –
“Proofs exist only in mathematics and logic, not in science. Mathematics and logic are both closed, self-contained systems of propositions, whereas science is empirical and deals with nature as it exists. The primary criterion and standard of evaluation of scientific theory is evidence, not proof. All else equal (such as internal logical consistency and parsimony), scientists prefer theories for which there is more and better evidence to theories for which there is less and worse evidence. Proofs are not the currency of science. – “
https://www.psychologytoday.com/gb/blog/the-scientific-fundamentalist/200811/common-misconceptions-about-science-i-scientific-proof
“The reality is that science deals in probabilities, not proofs. The reasons for that range from the philosophical to the practical, but if you really want to understand the nature of science, then it is very important that you understand the concept of proof. Therefore, I am going to go over some of the reasons why science doesn’t prove anything, then I am going to explain why that is actually a good thing and should not make you question the reliability of science.”https://thelogicofscience.com/2016/04/19/science-doesnt-prove-anything-and-thats-a-good-thing/
“Even when scientists have lots of very strong evidence, they rarely claim to have found proof because proof is absolute. To prove something means there is no chance another explanation exists”
https://journalistsresource.org/media/dont-say-prove-research-tip-sheet/#:~:text=Even%20when%20scientists%20have%20lots,no%20chance%20another%20explanation%20exists.
“But one word is rarely spoken or printed in science and that word is “proof”. In fact, science has little to do with “proving” anything.”
https://theconversation.com/wheres-the-proof-in-science-there-is-none-30570
And here’s a little overview of the scientific method from UC Berkeley, which might help you get a clearer picture .
https://undsci.berkeley.edu/understanding-science-101/the-core-of-science-relating-evidence-and-ideas/
Science is about making an observation, formulating an hypothesis, and testing that hypothesis until it breaks against the data. The better the hypothesis fits the data without breaking the higher the probability it is accurate or at least not completely inaccurate.
The hypothesis that bacteria are connected causally with some disease processes is supported quite robustly by empirical observation and some data. It is not proven, because few things in science can be and it is not how science works.
Hope we can all be on the same page now
Newton’s first law is not about probabilities. Gravity is not about probabilities. Entropy is not about probabilities, likewise the laws of thermodynamics. Hot air rising is not about a probability. The melting points of iron, structural steel, and other metals is not about probabilities.
You’re not even on a page, you are just spouting nonsense.
They are all about probabilities.
Newton’s First Law, like all scientific laws, exists in a dynamic state where it applies until it fails the next test. It is currently demonstrated to apply by empirical observation and ongoing experiment. However if future experiment violates it (as some quantum processes do) then our understanding needs to change.
Science is a dynamic open system where “proof” is conditional, which is why the term is discouraged.
I provided you with several links that develop this. It must be more than apparent to you if you follow these that I’m just repeating a scientific truism.
Most science students get this dinned into them before they leave school. How you have managed to study science but miss this fundamental is baffling.
Btw I’m having a hard time understanding why you and our friend Researcher seem to take this so personally. It’s a scientific discussion about ongoing research. Let’s keep it amiable, ok?
Show us where and when bacteria have been fingered as pathogens, in procedures which satisfied all 4 of Koch’s Postulates. Please!
Can you first demonstrate where Koch’s postulates is shown to make this argument so easy to settle?
Are you aware you’re enjoying internet delivered via fibre optics, whereas the phenomenon of light can’t actually be fully scientifically determined? This does not change the fact you’re experiencing the internet.
Different fields of science. Koch made his postulates the gold standard regarding any proof that a bacterium is a pathogen. He supposedly created the field of bacteriology. He furthermore hypothesized entities which later became “viruses” because bacteria could not be fingered even remotely for so many diseases.
“Reject it, and instead, trust the centuries of evidence-based medicine that have consistently improved human health and longevity.’
Some of it, maybe even most of it. Until, oh, I dunno…covidiscam & the vaxxx?
All intentional murder/harm/infertility/depop since then.
Unfortunately, germ theory (and much of allopathy) has always been based on fraud since it’s inception.
That’s why iatrogenesis is the number one cause of death.
For those that want to understand the full picture, they can read:
*The Contagion Myth
*Can You Catch A Cold?
*Bechamp or Pasteur
*Good-Bye Germ Theory: Ending a Century of Medical Fraud
*What Really Makes You Ill
*Virus Mania
*The Invisible Rainbow
*Rockefeller Medicine Men
*The Lethal Dose – Murder by Medicine Is No Accident
*Dissolving Illusions
*Murder By Injection
25 historical books that demonstrate vaccines have caused serious harm for 200 years.
ViroLIEgy.
Christine Massey’s FOIs.
Most of the books listed above (where no links are provided), can all be found on archive.org.
I am reading “What Really Makes you Ill”, by our old friend Dawn, who at least has secured a helper this time. I hope he understands more about the nature of the scientific method than she appears to.
I haven’t got to the part about the nature of infection but their introduction is interesting.
They make some good broad points about the over-reliance on medication in western medicine. I’m no fan of vaccines for the most part so agree there.
But they just go too far.
Yes, many drugs are unnecessary or over-prescribed or excessively dangerous for what they achieve – but some really do save or improve lives! It seems reckless in the extreme to try to write them all off.
I note with some relief that they at least advize caution to any psychiatric patients electing to come off their meds. That shows a least some sense of responsibility. But I know of people enduring horrendous hallucinations due to schizophrenia, who would suffer very badly if deprived of their meds. Should they not be subscribed these drugs because of some ideological imperative that says ALL western medicine is evil?
I’ll continue reading.
Can you read and understand what it is you have just read? Evidence based method had nothing to do with perpetrating the covid scam, but a lot to do with exposing that scam.
“When consciousness rots, ideology oozes out… The SI
‘Terrain Theory’ exists only in the imagination of its critics…
The terrain hypothesis, on the other hand…
Well there’s a lot of intuition involved, but as every technocratic minded
techno-zek will tell you, using your intuition is not scientific – unless
there’s one of those scientific revelations called “Lightbulb Moments”
(aka – Enlightenment)…
Meryl Nass, queen virus pusher against clotshots.
And good for her.
…pocketbook (?)
it’s a complex world…
😉
But it is a complex world isn’t it. People like Nass, and all of us, can be right and wrong at the same time. I would rather discuss the evidence than engage in witch hunts. What does the latter gain us?
Rather than calling someone a shill point out where they’re wrong. That way if they are genuinely mistaken you might help them, and if they are a shill you’ve made their attempts to deceive a tad more difficult
Disagree. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Those that consistently back criminal fraud (whether it’s through omission, misdirection or lies, like Nass) and scientific fraud, are cult members and order followers. Wittingly or unwittingly.
They ultimately cause more harm than good, so their intentions are a moot point.
Thus, they are preventing true understanding for the majority of how to maintain their health, by promoting the Intelligence created controlled opposition networks, both tacitly and overtly supporting the use of toxic Rx and toxic vaccines against dis-eases caused by poisoning, malnutrition, dehydration, EMFs and injury. Not germs.
Iatrogenesis is the number one cause of death.
if bacteria are not a causal factor in creating certain diseases and pathologies then why did antibiotics cut mortality from serious wound infection by up to 80% when first introduced?
if bacteria are not a causal factor in creating certain diseases and pathologies then how did antibiotics slash mortality from pneumonia?
And so on and so on…
Faked stats. Bacteria are a cleanup/recycle mechanism not the cause.
Malaria is caused by 5G Towers. The idea that mosquitoes are a vector of contagion is ridiculous.
Meryl Nass, gatekeeper extroadinare. A couple of years back when I listened to a few of the Interviews she took part in I noticed she would always try to steer the conversation back to viruses, pushing ridiculous lab leak theories of super scary contagious pathogens, which everyone with a functioning brain should know by now are a bogus hoax.
Naming Names?
“They” want to know if we can finger any of the cabal leaders involved in all this mess.