Is the virus real (part 2)

Is the virus real? (part 2)

Part 2 follows on from Part 1 that can be found here:

Is the virus real (part-1)


Reconstruction versus Isolation

In the second part of our investigation into the virus we are going to further investigate the “isolation” of the virus.  The virus has not been isolated in the genuine sense of the word –it has been reconstructed. 

The virus first appeared round about the 12 th of Dec (see the TIMELINE link on the PDF) and we have included in the PDF below the published dates of some of the first articles that sequenced the genome.  The timeline suggests that the work was done by the Chinese on Jan 3 naming it 2019-nCoV the WHO named the disease COVID-19 on Feb 11.  The first article on sequencing was published on Jan 30.  So, it took less than a month for the new disease to be identified and the first article to be published.  In fact, almost exactly two months between the first case and the WHO naming it COVID-19.

Your web browser doesn’t have a PDF Plug-in. Click to download Covid articles 

All the samples taken were from bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF).   This is a medical procedure in which a bronchoscope is passed through the mouth or nose into the lungs. Fluid is then squirted into a small part of the lung and then recollected for analysis. Sputum is a combination of saliva and phlegm or mucus that is expelled from the upper respiratory tract.

In other words, the “virus” is in a bunch of lung fluid and snot.  Of course, there are also many other things present, especially in the lungs.  A man was once found to have a pine sapling growing in his lungs, another a sweet pea.  Spores and fungi can be present. Pollution can be present. All sorts of human DNA and RNA can be present.  In fact, the kitchen sink could be present (lol). Now I freely admit that I am no genetics expert and these papers are difficult to evaluate because they use so much jargon.  Therefore, a column was created called “definitions” in which the meaning of certain terms is described.

The thing that becomes clear from this exercise is that we are dealing with a jumble of DNA and RNA from different sources and the virus is “isolated” from this soup using computer algorithms and modelling.  The so called isolation is not a physical separation but a very complex mathematical computation; we cannot speak of isolation as such only of “reconstruction” and something that is theoretically reconstructed (no matter how good the computing) is still only a model. We know from experience how bad climate and epidemiological modelling has been.  Garbage in garbage out (as the saying goes).  What is the likelihood (probability) that the virus does look exactly like this?  Is the sequencing correct?   We do have Electron Microscope pictures of the virus.  But are we looking at a virus? We see something with spikes protruding (the crown) but is it an exosome? If the thing we are looking at has not been properly isolated using Koch’s postulates and then sequenced on its own how can we know?  When I hear words like homology modelling and default parameters my spidey sense starts tingling.  They are even using quantum computing to model the virus so that they can make vaccines.  Personally, I cannot wait to try out some vaccine that was designed based on some virtual model (sic).  What could possibly go wrong? I mean they can calculate the position of every atom.  They can probably tell you were each electron is and every quark as well.   You know what?  I think I will give it a miss.

Computational Biology

We imagine this work being done by Medical Doctors etc, but they are computer nerds. Do you remember the fatal shooting of a Chinese-born coronavirus researcher in Pittsburgh?  Apparently, it was a murder suicide (a lover’s tiff) and if you think otherwise you are a “conspiracy theorist”. Liu, a native of China, earned his bachelor’s degree and PhD in computer science in Singapore before conducting research in the US. According to friends he “was on the verge of making very significant findings” towards understanding the cellular mechanisms of Covid-19 infection”.   The gunman was identified as 46-year-old software engineer Hao Gu.   Nothing to see here move along.

Computational biology

We are living in the age of Computational biology, which includes many aspects of bioinformatics, is the science of using biological data to develop algorithms or models to understand biological systems and relationships.  After all we are all just code so why not let some coders lose on us (God forbid).  This mindset explains why Bill Gates with his anti-virus software and clunky windows code is now trying to change your code.  Does this explain why world health is in the hands of a computer geek?  He and his cohorts view humanity as code that can be re-written or over written and presumably re-programmed.    We are nothing more than bases, acids, and proteins to be manipulated at will.  Instead of dropping by the doctor next time I feel sick I think I will just find a software engineer.

The Protein Spike

Now we come to the protein spike which was described in the NYT article (April 3).  If you are not familiar with the previous article see the following article that describes the insertion of the spike protein:

The smoking Gun PRRA

Suffice to say it was suggested that the dangerous code for the protein spike was inserted using a technique called CRISPR.  The following article has a video on CRISPR and links Kawasaki disease with electromagnetism:

The virus on a motorbike

Is the virus completely fake?

In previous articles I still clung to the idea that the virus had some basis in the real world. However, that now seems more and more unlikely.   I mean what is the probability that the spike calculates the gematria value of 72 as well as all the other “coincidences” (sic).  If you run these through the gematria calculator (English ordinal) you get 72.


Note that it is covid-19….

…. 53+19=72Another Coincidence?

Also note that the spike protein code has 12 letters (12 tribes) and contains 5G

ccu cgg cgg gca

The number 72 is associated with the number of Gentile nations in the Greek Old Testament (Septuagint LXX).  It is the Sanhedrin (70 judges) headed by Moses and Aaron (72). Then there is the 72 names of God and the 72 angels/demons (see the Kabbalah and Zohar). The Jews can charge the gentiles interest and that is how they conquered the world -through finance.  There is even a rule of thumb called the rule of 72 for calculating compound interest. And the number of vaccinations that American kids get before the age of 18 is 72 vaccinations.  The Jews control finance and medicine.  No wonder Gates is always smirking.   None of this is coincidence as absurd as it all sounds this has all been planned for a long time.


What of the sickness and death then?

Ah, I hear you say, but the scientists have injected Covid-19 into monkeys and hamsters etc and made them sick.  If I am ill and inject you with some of my BALF will that make you sick? If my BALF is not purified will it trigger a similar immune response if injected into you?  Would you like some of my snot? (lol).  Does this mean you have been infected by my virus or does it mean my exosomes trigger your natural defence (exosomes)?   Who knows?

If the manifestation of the virus is an exosome and the virus itself is just a computer model how come people are getting sick and testing positive?  Well, as we know the test is non-linear and depending on the amplification differing results can be obtained.  And the fact is that PCR is indiscriminate and can pick up on other corona type viruses, even on the common cold. The coronavirus is the cause of about 20% of colds. People are sick, but common influenza strains have disappeared. Where has influenza gone?   Influenza cases have obviously been subsumed by the covid figures.   And then we have the overlapping 5G symptoms. And then we have the falsified death certificates and inflated numbers.  And the constant fear porn.  And confusing, conflicting information. I think we can now safely say that it is a psychological operation to roll out 5G, reset the financial system and usher in the NWO. Watch this brilliant video by David Icke who seems to have come to a similar conclusion:

Or go directly here for the video:

The Geo-politics

Other things have also become clearer to me now.  David Icke is correct that China is central to the globalist’s plans.  The Jews were fundamental to the Chinese Revolution just as they were to the Russian Communist Revolution.  They were also behind the opening of China during the Nixon era knowing full well that the capitalist West would exploit the cheap labor and de-industrialize.  China became the testing ground for the big tech companies for the coming Orwellian technocracy and surveillance state.  There were biological experiments carried out in the community in various places such as Fort Detrick (the United States Army Medical Command installation located in Frederick, Maryland) but these were distractions. The psychological operation was launched in Wuhan to coincide with the military games to cause as much confusion as possible.  Coincidentally, both Wuhan and northern-Italy were high pollution areas where 5G was rolled out.  The media did the rest by hyping the fear porn.


What always puzzled me was the role of Trump and the Anglo-Zionists in all this.  It is obvious that the globalists (Soros, WHO, Fauci, Brix, Gates, Democrats et al) have undermined the USA to implement their NWO.   It is also obvious that they hate Trump.  In the UK, a coup has just occurred to replace the globalist Mark Sedwell (the Senior Civil Servant Cabinet Secretary and NSA chief) and his clique leaving the Anglo-Zionists in the ascendancy?  However, the policies regarding lockdown etc have barely changed.   What is going on?


We are seeing a power struggle between the globalists and the Anglo-Zionists.   The struggle is for the coveted leadership roles in the NWO.  Both sides want the vaccines, the economic reset and the coming technocracy. Both sides want to be in charge.  It is a case of “would sir like chocolate sauce with his ice cream or sprinkles?”  In both cases the ice cream has the same underlying flavour.  Whoever wins the Jews win.  Always bet on Jacob.    It is not Flu Manchu but Flu Manju.



Is the virus real (part-1)

Is the virus real?    (part 1)

On the face of it an utterly ridiculous question.  The gut response (and mine also) is…of course it is, real people are getting sick (and dying) and it is contagious.  Can’t get more real than that. However, I know for a fact that they are also conducting a psychological operation and using the media to ramp up fear and there are elements about the virus that are highly suspicious.

 I thought it was time to examine the question again and draw all the threads together into a coherent narrative. That is how you conduct proper science. You constantly evaluate and re-evaluate as new evidence becomes available.  What led to this was a comment I posted about the virus never being isolated using Koch’s postulate after which I was sent links to about ten different scientific articles showing how it had been isolated and how it had been injected into monkeys, mice and hamsters etc and made them sick with similar symptoms…so there (lol).

 Now these scientific articles are difficult to read – they are not in plain English and I think this is often deliberate obfuscation.   Moreover, unless you work in that particular field it can be difficult to evaluate the methodology.   Now, I did do microbiology many moons ago and worked as a junior scientist  at a lab researching plant pathogens.  Although I have done work with bacteria and used the ELISA  technique (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay is a plate-based assay technique designed for detecting and quantifying soluble substances such as peptides, proteins, antibodies, and hormones) I am not familiar with virology or the newer DNA sequencing techniques etc.  However, science is about critical thinking and evaluating not just about technique. Anybody (scientist or not) can evaluate a methodology.

Koch’s Postulate

The whole argument is about Koch’s Postulate which is about how you establish the cause of a disease.   This is not as easy as you might think.  First you have to find a bug. You need to isolate the germ from a sick human or animal (say from their saliva). Then you need to purify the bug and isolate it from the spit and snot or blood etc. Then you need to inject the purified bug into a healthy  animal or human to see if they get the same illness. Then you need to isolate the bug again from the  person or animal that you made sick and check that it is indeed the same bug. It is a sort of “double check” .  It is the  gold standard for identifying the cause of diseases.






Click here to enlarge


Were the criteria established by Koch’s applied?

In theory, if the methodology established by Koch is not exactly followed you cannot speak of a particular “germ” being the cause of a disease.   Let us say you always find the presence of X-particle in a person that is sick — that does not mean that X-particle is causing the disease.    It could be that X-particle is simply part of an immune response against an environmental onslaught.   It could be that your own body produces X-particle as a response to a particular attack from outside.   It might not be the cause of the disease but a symptom.

The only way to establish it for sure is to use Koch’s principles and here is where I fell down the rabbit hole because although Koch’s postulate works fine for bacteria it does not work for viruses.  Apparently when you isolate a virus in vitro (in  glass eg test tube etc) it looses its pathogenicity.  It can no longer make you sick.     Ruh, Roh. 

I found a paper discussing a problem with a different virus. The paper is from 2010 and is about a different virus but the problem back then is the same as now: 


De´ja ` Vu All Over Again: Koch’s Postulates
and Virology in the 21st Century

John V. Williams

Departments of Pediatrics and Microbiology and Immunology, Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, and the Monroe Carell Jr. Children’s Hospital
at Vanderbilt, Nashville, Tennessee

This article describes prolonged shedding
of the recently identified human bocavirus
(HBoV) by children and detection of
HBoV in the absence of respiratory symptoms.

 So, I have done something naughty and taken the relevant passages from his article (which is very good) and changed the HBoV into Covid etc to reflect the current situation:

Another feature used to assign disease causality [to Covid] is the absence of the virus in healthy individuals. However asymptomatic subjects do have the "disease"
The work also nicely illustrates a common problem facing modern virologists: how to assign disease [Covid] causality to a microorganism that is not amenable to Koch’s postulates.


HBoV [Covid] has been detected in serum samples [13, 16] and stool specimens [14, 28–30] by PCR, but the biological significance of this is not clear. 


So the PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) test detects something…but how relevant is it? And the amplification is non-linear.   Depending on the sensitivity you can more or less influence the outcome (positive or negative).  You can get what you want.

Does HBoV [Covid]contribute to the pathogenesis of a specific clinical syndrome in either a primary or helper fashion? Is there a contribution of host immune response to HBoV [Covid]reactivation and detection during intercurrent infection? The many unanswered questions about this newly discovered virus return us to basic approaches for establishing causation and pathogenesis regarding any virus.
Koch espoused his core principles regarding the proof of an etiologic role for a potential pathogen in 1884. These postulates were revised by the eminent virologist Thomas Rivers in 1937 to reflect the biology of viruses, which, as obligate intracellular parasites, cannot be isolated in pure culture [37]. Huebner [38] further modified these principles in 1957, during the heyday of virus discovery that followed the development of tissue and cell culture.
Fredricks and Relman [39] eloquently applied these guidelines to sequence-based microbe discovery. There are numerouschallenges in proving viruses as the etiologic causes of specific syndromes: pro-longed viral shedding after acute illness (eg, enteroviruses); latent infection and asymptomatic shedding (eg, herpesviruses); clinical disease in a minority of infected individuals (eg, poliovirus); and re-current asymptomatic infection of immune adults (eg, respiratory syncytial virus) are but a few of these challenges. Huebner proposed a “Bill of Rights for Prevalent Viruses” that comprised a “guarantee against the imputation of guilt by simple association” [38, pp. 434–437] consisting of 8 conditions: (1) isolation of a virus in culture; (2) repeated recovery of the virus from human specimens; (3)antibody response to the virus; (4) characterization and comparison with known pathogenic viruses; (5) constant association of the virus with specific illness; (6)reproduction of clinical illness in volunteer challenge studies; (7) epidemiologic studies (with controlled longitudinal studies offering the greatest value); and (8)prevention of disease by vaccination. The difficulty in meeting several of these conditions for HBoV,[Covid] or for any other new virus, is immediately obvious.

 This article was written 10 years ago about a different virus.  It asks valid questions that have still not been answered.  So, this is not just a bunch of  “tin foil hat” people who have recently jumped on a bandwagon. The science shows that the question is far more nuanced and the results far more uncertain than some like to make out.

From the horses mouth

This is what the scientist involved with the first testing and identification of the virus say in their scientific articles.












Click here to enlarge

In all of these papers they admit that they have not purified the virus.  So, then what are you looking at under the Electron Microscope?  You cannot say for sure that it is a virus because you have not purified it.   So, you are not using Koch’s postulates as even the Zhu paper admits.

Although our study does not fulfill Koch’s postulates, our analyses provide evidence implicating 2019-nCoV in the Wuhan outbreak. 

Zhu N et al. A Novel Coronavirus from Patients with Pneumonia in China, 2019. N Engl J Med. 2020 Jan 14.

 I am sorry Zhu Manchu but if it does not fulfill Koch’s postulates it does not provide evidence of anything.   My backside does not fulfill Koch’s postulates either, nor does it provide evidence of WuFlu.

For further evidence see David Crowe:  COVID SCIENCE: A Challenge to the Discovery of the Virus. Or see his more extensive PDF here: Flaws in Coronavirus Pandemic Theory

The Challenges and requests for information

A number of people have offered challenges and even rewards to scientists to prove that the virus does exists.  This doctor offers you 5000 bucks if you can prove the existence and a European doctor offers 100000.  So far no takers.



Health Canada has no record of “COVID-19 virus” isolation


What is causing the disease if it is not a virus?

The answer put forward is that the tests are picking up on exosomes.  These are pieces of RNA “solvents” that the body excretes when it is under immunological stress and needs to get rid of toxins.  Like viruses, exosomoes are “dead” and need “living tissue”… you see where this is going?


Could the cause of “viruses” be environmental or terrain factors?



The fact is that both Wuhan and Northern Italy were the first hit and the worst hit. They both had very high pollution including particulate matter and also high cyanide (from Industry and traffic) and both rolled out 5G at about the time that the virus struck. Now we all know that causation is not correlation but the anecdotal evidence is getting stronger.  They have trillions invested in this new technology and 5G has many overlapping symptoms with Covid.  Something is going on.  Look at recent data from the USA:


Koch’s postulates have not be fulfilled.  No point denying it as the scientists themselves admit it.  On that basis alone we would be justified in saying that the virus was not real.  However, we are not so hasty although it does raise a giant red flag as does the introduction of 5G.  In part 2 we will delve further into the whole scamdemic and try and establish what is really going on – is the Wu Flu a  Flu Manchu  or  is it a Flu Manju…?