Translated and edited by Northern Tracey and John Blaid
From German article: https://wissenschafftplus.de/uploads/article/wissenschafftplus-virologen.pdf
The causes of the corona crisis clearly identified
Virologists who claim there are pathogenic viruses are scientific fraudsters and are subject to criminal prosecution, by Dr. Stefan Lanka
Summary Science and scientific study are important tools that help identify and solve problems. Science has very clear rules: Anyone who makes a claim has to prove the claim clearly, comprehensibly and in a verifiable manner. Only statements that are verifiable can be called scientific, everything else falls within the field of beliefs. Matters of faith cannot be presented as scientifically proven facts in order to derive or justify government actions. The meaning and choice of words in all publications on all disease-causing viruses has proven that virologists not only violate the laws of thought, logic and the binding rules of science, but have themselves refuted their own claims of the existance of disease-causing viruses . If you have taken off the hypnotic fear glasses and read objectively with understanding what the authors do and write, anyone who is interested in English and has acquired knowledge of the methods used will find that these virologists (with the exception of those who work with phages and the phage-like giant viruses) misinterpret normal gene sequences as viral components and have thus refuted their entire area of expertise. This is particularly easy to see in the case of the alleged existence of the alleged SArS-CoV-2 virus. Scientific statements must be refutable, falsifiable, in order to be allowed to present them as scientific facts. The first written duty of every scientist is to strictly check his own statements and to try to refute them. Only in the event that this refutation has not succeeded and the failure has been clearly documented by control tests, can a statement be described as scientific.
All corona measures that the governments and subordinate authorities have enacted are ultimately regulated by laws, in Germany the Infection Protection Act (ifSG), but only seemingly legitimized and not justified. With § 1 ifSG, for example, the definition "scientific” subjects all those living/working in Germany to the rules of science. The most important rule of science is a documented, unsuccessful attempt to refute the statement that is passed off as scientific truth. Compliance with the laws of thought and logic precedes all scientific rules. If these are disregarded or violated, the scientific statement is refuted just as if by a successful control experiment.
Since these virologists have clearly violated the laws of thought, logic and the rules of scientific work with their statements and through their actions, they can be described colloquially as science fraudsters. However, since scientific fraud does not occur in criminal law and there are no precedents here yet, I propose (and will do so myself) to have the fraud of virologists - pretending to be scientific but acting and arguing antiscientific - exposed judicially and in criminal law. The responsible state authorities are called upon to prosecute these anti-scientific fraudsters in order to prevent them from doing their anti-scientific and consequently antisocial and dangerous activities.
Mankind is facing a great challenge: The inherent dynamics and consequences of fear and anti-biosis through the taught biology and executive medicine, disturbs and destroys the environment, plants, animals, people and the economy. The corona crisis is only the visible tip of an iceberg on a collision course with everyone and everything. One of the reasons for this challenge is materialism, the attempt to explain life through purely material models. Our present-day materialism was invented in “post-Socratic” antiquity as an explicit reaction to the generation of fear and abuse of power by religions. This was an understandable, human and humanitarian action, but it has had dramatic consequences. This materialism has taught ‘good versus bad’ biology, the “prevailing opinion” is based on this in medicine bringing the resulting anti-biosis (antibiotics, radiation, chemotherapy, disinfection, restriction of basic rights, vaccination, lock-down, quarantine, social distancing, etc.). More and more people, the environment and the economy are being damaged by this ideology. Their materialistic good-bad theory, which has no factual basis but is based on refuted assumptions, developed behind closed doors into the most powerful religion.
The materialistic theory of life says that there are only atoms, no consciousness, no spiritual forces and no creator to create them and set them in motion. In order to be able to explain the cosmos and life in a purely material way, our “science” is forced to claim a big bang, in which all atoms that have flown apart emerged from nothing. Some atoms would accidentally touch each other and form molecules by chance coming together. These molecules formed a primordial cell from which all further life arose through struggle and selection. All of this, said to have happened in the distant past unimaginable lengths of time ago, is therefore withdrawn from scientific examination and therefore cannot be described as scientific.
The “theoretical physics” with its quantum theories, which fantasizes a way of thinking with ever greater capital investment into ever smaller things, we will leave out here. For a better, actual and simple experimentally amenable view of life, I refer to the very substance of which life is made. It is the elementary substance of which the membrane consists, the so-called surface tension membrane of water, which water forms wherever it comes into contact with other substances or with itself during movement and vortices. Aristotle called this substance ether and Dr. Peter Augustine rediscovered the form of the original substance. Japanese plant physiologists called this substance pi-water. This knowledge and perspective resulting from the knowledge of the ether / primordial substance also revives the pre-Socratic principle, making it conceivable and imaginable: as on a large scale so on a small scale. Thinking in atomic theory makes it difficult, even impossible, to imagine this concept and the worlds of ideas and forces, if no other way of thinking is utilized or frowned upon, we misunderstand. The entire academic world of biology and medicine is based on such a misconception.
In 1848, when the constructive effects of the French revolution in Germany had a chance to develop, attempts at upheaval failed and resulted in a dramatic hardening and deterioration of political and social life. While in 1848 the people, in the current development of biology and medicine, advocated humane, logical and correct measures for “epidemic prophylaxis”. In the ten years that followed they adapted to the hardening and increasingly extreme political conditions. It was rudolf Virchow who in 1858 postulated the cell theory of life and all diseases with no scientific basis, but based exclusively on the atomic theory of Democritus and Epicurus: cellular pathology. Rudolf Virchow suppressed “relevant facts” from embryology and tissue science throughout his life in order to be able to present and popularize his new cell theory as factual. However, this knowledge of embryology and tissue theory, the germ layers theory of life, is an indispensable prerequisite for understanding life, its development and, above all, disease, healings, healing crises and healing barriers.
Rudolf Virchow stuck rigorously to the atomic theory that all life comes from one cell - the cell is the smallest, indivisible unit of life, which would also manifest all diseases through the formation of alleged poisons, in Latin virus. This laid the foundation on which the gene, infection, immune and cancer theories had to develop in order to explain the processes of life, disease and healing within the theory. If we believe, because it is taught, that all processes are only caused by material interactions and that all life arises from one cell, followers of this theory are forced to adopt a constructive and functional plan of life, i.e. a genetic material, and to assert this exists.
The same coercive logic results for the alleged poisons. If the cell allegedly produces viruses = disease toxins as the cause of the disease in order to distribute them inside and outside the body, a place in an individual must be asserted where and in which this disease toxin, the virus, arose for the first time. If this way of thinking becomes dogma, nothing else may be taught to refute it and other views are defamed as unscientific or a conspiracy against the state. It excludes from the outset other ways of thinking and imagining the development of diseases within a body or in a group of people . This coercive logic only looks for the causes in the categories of material defects or material malevolence.
It is kept quiet that viruses are a collection of dangerous genes. It is concealed that there is still no reliable scientific evidence for the assumption of gene sequences that could be called viruses. The good news is that the new genetic virology, which had its boom from 1954, has actually refuted itself by its own statements in a scientific way, i.e. easily comprehensible and verifiable. This statement is 100% correct, proven and I stand by this statement as a virologist, as a scientist, as a citizen and as a person.
The transition from toxin virology to today’s gene virology
The disease poison idea is still quite effective as dangerous bacterial protein toxins are still being claimed. Or bacteria, such as the corkscrew bacteria that are claimed to be dangerous and that allegedly bore their way from the suspected point of entry via the nerves to the brain. What virologists, medical professionals and science journalists are hiding is the fact that the idea that was valid until 1951 that viruses were defined as protein toxins had to be given up this year. In order to prove the assumption and assertion of toxic viruses and to to assert them as scientific, two control experiments were carried out:
1. healthy tissues were exposed to putrefaction and not just tissues supposedly damaged by viruses. It was found that the proteins produced when healthy tissue decayed are the same as those produced when “virus-infected” tissue decayed. The virus assumption was thus refuted.
2. The protein-toxin-virus assumption was also refuted by the fact that nothing different could be found and photographed in the electron microscope in “virus-infected” people, animals and their fluids than in healthy people. Incidentally, that has remained the case to this day.
Clinical, i.e. medical, virology refuted itself with these successful control attempts and gave up with words of regret, but was only noticed by attentive readers of specialist journals.
This fact has been suppressed by the mass media as the hypnotists of power celebrated their ongoing vaccination campaigns. Although the viruses were lost as a justification for vaccinating, also because of the silence of the health authorities and “science” the vaccination campaigns were not interrupted. After the abandonment of virology, biology and medicine could find no other explanation for the diseases defined as viral and phenomena of simultaneous or increased occurrence of diseases within the purely material cell theory.
So those involved were forced to invent a new theory of what viruses should be in the future. They were based on actually existing structures called Phages which are formed by bacteria when they are removed from their environment and when the vital exchange with other bacteria and microbes is prevented. As a young student, I was fortunate enough to isolate such a phage-like structure from the sea, to study its structure, composition and interaction with the environment. This led me directly into the field of virology, because I unsuspectingly believed that I had discovered a harmless virus and a stable virus-host relationship to research the origin of viruses. 30 years later, new structures, now known as “giant viruses”, were and are constantly being discovered. In the meantime it has been clearly proven that they are in the beginning processes of biological life as it begins or becomes visible to us.
The structures erroneously called phages, i.e. bacteria eater and giant viruses, can also be described as a type of spore that bacteria and simply organized living beings form when their living conditions change in such a way that they can no longer ideally reproduce or survive. Depending on the type, these helpful structures always consist of a strand of the so-called genetic material DNA that is exactly the same length and is composed exactly the same. This type of DNA is always surrounded by a shell of the same dense substance from which biological life emerges. That is the reason why “phages” and “giant viruses” -let’s rather call them bionts - can be easily isolated, ie enriched and separated from all other components of life. In this isolated form they can and are regularly analyzed biochemically. With every biochemical characterization it turns out that the nucleic acid of a type of “phage” or “giant virus” always has exactly the same length and always exactly the same composition.
In fact, phage have been the only source of pure nucleic acid (DNA) in biochemical studies for decades. The process of taking up and releasing DNA into and out of bacteria documented in the electron microscope was interpreted as an infection. Completely without evidence, it was claimed that phages attack bacteria, rape them, force their nucleic acids on them and the bacteria die as a result. In reality, the situation is completely different. Only bacteria that are extremely inbred, that is, are constantly reproduced without having contact with other bacteria or microbes, are transformed into phages in an act of metamorphosis. This conversion is misinterpreted as the killing of the bacteria by phages. On the other hand, bacteria that are freshly isolated from their environment never change into phages and also do not die if phages are added to them in any amount. This is also the reason why the often cited phage therapy as a substitute for antibiotics (to suppress pain and other symptoms) - as with any other poisoning- can never and will never function in the desired sense and scope.
The biology of phages and giant viruses and the resulting refutation of the cell theory of life
In the case of the alga (ectocarpus siliculosus), from which I isolated its “giant viruses”, the situation is as follows: The mobile forms of the algae, the gametes and spores, search for the “giant viruses” in their environment with their flexible flagella and take them “Giant viruses” into themselves. The growing algae integrate the nucleic acids of the “giant viruses” into their own chromosomes. It was observed that the algae with “giant viruses” are doing better than those without. It has never been observed that the algae with “giant viruses” are worse off than those without. New and more and more astonishing “giant viruses” with ever more astonishing properties are constantly being found and more and more evidence is being created that bacteria and microorganisms, amoebas and unicellular organisms arise from “giant viruses” into which they are transformed again.
Giant viruses evidently arise through and around nucleic acids that develop catalytic activities, i.e. they release energy on their own, synthesize further nucleic acids, other molecules and substances. As a result, they constantly develop new properties and skills. The particularly reactive and diverse nucleic acid forms of rNA, keyword “The rNA world”, which can easily and continuously transform into DNA and back again, also arise in the process of self-organization of life, without any scientifically inferred reason or cause. it materializes quite obviously out of the water, the biological life visible to us. More and more cellular organisms are being found whose genome consists largely of the nucleic acids of “giant viruses”. With the discovery of phages, which are only ever produced during the conversion of extremely inbred (incest) bacterial cultures, and giant viruses that maintain, enlarge and actively metabolize themselves, three things have been proven so far:
i. The cell theory - that biological life only exists in the form of cells and only arises from cells has been refuted.
ii. The claim that biological life arose in the gray prehistoric times has been refuted. Life is constantly emerging anew and before our eyes if we only look at life objectively and not restricted by any dogmas or unfounded theories. It has been proven that biological life as we know it now can arise wherever there is water and perhaps also under conditions that are the same or similar to those on our mother planet earth.
iii. The negative interpretation that the uptake of nucleic acids by “phages” and “giant viruses” in other organisms was interpreted as infection and as harmful has been refuted. From 1952 onwards, however, this observation gave rise to the belief that there were genetic viruses in humans that cause diseases by transmitting their “dangerous” nucleic acids and can be held responsible for death and ruin. To date, a virus has not been seen in any human, animal, plant or fluid or isolated from it. To date, it has not even been possible to isolate a nucleic acid that would correspond to the length and composition of the genetic material of the alleged disease-causing viruses, although the isolation, representation and analysis of the composition of nucleic acids of this length has long been possible using the simplest standard techniques.
A nobel prize and its fatal consequences
In isolated form, “phages” and “giant viruses” (bionts) can be photographed quickly and easily in large numbers with an electron microscope and this alone can document their degree of purity. The isolation and the photographing of isolated and characterized structures has not yet succeeded with any of the alleged disease-causing viruses! Bionts (aka phages and giant viruses) are regularly seen in large numbers in the electron microscope and photographed in the organisms that produce them or that produce them (sic!). On the other hand, photographing structures with an electron microscope, which are claimed to be pathogenic viruses, is not possible in any human, animal, plant or in fluids from them, such as blood, seeds, saliva etc. To date, none of the viruses that are considered to be pathogenic have been successfully found and documented! Why not?
Electron microscope images of alleged viruses only show structures that are always obtained from completely different sources. These structures were (as can be easily traced and verified on the basis of the publications) never isolated, neither characterized biochemically, nor used as a source for the short pieces of nucleic acids from which the virologists construct a long nucleic acid that is supposed to be the genetic strand of a virus.
From all types of “phages” and “giant viruses”, nucleic acids of exactly the same length and exactly the same composition can be obtained every time. It has never been possible to isolate a nucleic acid (DNA or rNA) from a structure or from a liquid, the length and composition of which would correspond to what virologists claim to be the genetic material of a disease-causing virus.
The sequence of what happened between 1951 and December 10, 1954 makes it clear why and how the virologists completely detoured into a dangerous anti-scientific approach that is completely removed from reality. After medical virology was finished in 1951 through control experiments, from 1952 the bacterial phages became the model of the persistent ideology of what “disease-causing viruses” should look like: a nucleic acid of a certain length and composition, surrounded by a shell made up of a certain number of certain proteins.
But: In the absence of electron micrographs of “disease-causing viruses” in humans / animals / plants, in the absence of electron-microscopic images of “disease-causing viruses” in isolated form, in the absence of biochemical characterization of the components of “disease-causing viruses”, in the absence of isolation, the virologists up to today were and are forced to combine individual components of supposedly “virally” diseased tissue, mentally and graphically, to viruses and to pretend to themselves and the public these intellectual products are existing viruses!
The virologists who claim disease-causing viruses exist refer centrally to a single publication with which they justify what they are doing and pass it off as scientific. Doing this is easily recognizable as insane and anti-scientific. The authors who published these considerations on June 1, 1954, explicitly described their observations as speculations that have been refuted in themselves and that need to be checked in the future. This future review has not yet taken place, because the first author of this study, Prof. John Franklin Enders, received the Nobel Prize for Medicine on December 10, 1954. He was awarded the Nobel Prize for another speculation within the old "Viruses are dangerous protein toxins” theory, disproved in 1951. The Nobel Prize brought about two things: the old, refuted toxin-virus theory received a pseudo-scientific halo, and the new gene virology the highest, apparently scientific honor.
From 1952 the new genetic virology had two central principles: Disease-causing viruses are in principle structured like phages and they would arise when cells die in the test tube after supposedly infected sample material has been added to them. With their only publication dated June 1, 1954, Enders and his colleagues established the idea that cells that die in the test tube after adding supposedly infected material would turn into viruses. This death is also called isolation of the virus - because something is supposedly brought into the laboratory from outside - issued as the replication of the suspected virus and the dying cell mass used as a vaccine. Enders, his colleagues and all virologists overlooked this- being blinded by the Nobel Prize - that the death of the cells in the laboratory is not triggered by a virus, but because the cells in the laboratory are killed unintentionally and unnoticed but systematically. Through poisoning with cell-toxic antibiotics, through extreme starvation through the withdrawal of the nutrient solution and through the addition of decaying, i.e. decomposing and thus toxic metabolic products.
Components from the cells that die in the laboratory are still mentally assembled into a virus and presented as reality. The virology of disease-causing viruses is that simple. Enders and the "virologists” have never, until today, carried out the control tests to "infect the cells in the laboratory with sterile material.” They die in the control experiment in exactly the same way as with supposedly "viral” material.
Brief, clear and easily comprehensible refutation of the claims of all disease-causing viruses
Error and self-deception are human, understandable and excusable. What is not excusable are the constant claims of virologists that what they say and what they do is scientific. That is clearly wrong, easily verifiable and understandable for everyone. That is why the virologists who claim corona viruses or other disease-causing viruses are to be called fraudsters and are to be prosecuted using legal means so that they can withdraw their false, refuted and dangerous statements. In this way, the corona crisis and other "viral” catastrophes with resulting fatal consequences such as "AiDS”, "ebola” and other unfounded "viral” pandemics can and will not only be stopped, prevented in the future, but turned into opportunities for everyone.
The definition of what can be called a scientific statement and the resulting obligations are clearly defined. Summarized:
A. Every scientific claim must be verifiable, understandable and refutable.
B. Only if the refutation of a scientific statement by laws of thought, logic and, if applicable, by control experiments has not succeeded, may a statement be described as scientific.
C. Every scientist is obliged to check his own statements and to question them.
Because the virologists never carried out these checks themselves and, for understandable reasons, are reluctant to do so - who wants to refute their own thing, their reputation themselves - we must do this publicly with seven arguments. Every single argument alone is sufficient to refute the claimed existence of all “disease-causing viruses” and that of this type of virologist (except for researchers who deal with the existing “phages” and “giant viruses”). In the following points the word “virus” is used instead of the word combination “disease-causing virus”.
1. The fact of alignment = alignment
Virologists have never isolated a complete genome of a virus and presented it in its entire length. They always only use very short pieces of nucleic acids, the sequence of which consists of four molecules that make up nucleic acids, which they determine and call a sequence. From a multitude of millions of such specific, very short sequences, virologists mentally assemble a fictitious long genetic strand with the help of complex computational and statistical means. They call this process alignment, which means orientation.
The result of the complex alignment, this fictitious and very long genetic strand, is claimed by virologists to be the heart of a virus and also claims to prove the existence of a virus. However, such a complete strand never appears as a whole in reality or in scientific literature, although the simplest standard techniques have long been available to determine the length and composition of nucleic acids. With the use of alignment, instead of directly presenting a nucleic acid of the same length, the virologists disproved themselves.
2. The fact of the lack of control experiments on alignment / orientation
Virologists have never carried out and documented an alignment / orientation with equally short nucleic acids from control tests. For this purpose, they MUST isolate the short nucleic acids from the ex-act same cell culture procedure, with the difference that the suspected “infecti-on” does not happen by adding supposedly “infected” samples, but with sterile materials or sterilized samples that have been “control-infected”.
These logical and mandatory control tests have never been carried out and documented. With this alone, the virologists have proven that their statements have no scientific value and should NOT be passed off as scientific statements.
3. Alignment / orientation takes place only by means of conceptual constructs
In order to be able to assemble the very short sequences of the nucleic acids used into a long genome, the virologists need a template to align the short sequences into a very long, allegedly viral genetic strand. Without such a predetermined, very long sequence, it is not possible for any virologist to conceptually / computationally create a viral genetic strand. Virologists argue that the conceptually / computationally constructed genetic strand comes from a virus because the alignment / orientation was carried out using a different, predetermined viral genetic strand.
This argument of the virologists is thus briefly and clearly refuted, because all templates with which new genetic strands were conceptually / computationally generated were themselves exclusively mentally / computationally produced and did not come from a virus.
4. Viruses were never seen in a human / animal / plant or in fluids from it
Virologists claim that infectious, i.e. intact viruses are to be found in large numbers in the blood and saliva. That is why, for example, in the Corona crisis, everyone should wear a mask. To date, however, not a single virus has been photographed in saliva, blood or in other places in humans / animals / plants or liquids, although electron microscopic images are now an easy and routinely performed standard technique.
This clear and easily verifiable fact that there are no recordings of viruses in humans / animals / plants or liquids from them, refutes all virus claims. Something that has never been seen in humans / animals / plants or liquids from them should not be passed off as scientifically proven fact.
5. The composition of the structures that virologists claim to be viruses have never been characterized biochemically
There are two different techniques virologists use to take photos of alleged viruses. For the transparent (transmission) electron microscopy they use cell cultures, which they embed in synthetic resin, scrape into thin layers and look through. Particles that they show in such images were never isolated and their composition determined biochemically. All proteins and the long genetic strand assigned to the virus would have to be found. Neither that, nor the isolation of such embedded particles and the biochemical characterization of their composition appears in a single publication by virologists. This refutes the virologists’ claim that such recordings could be viruses.
The other method that virologists use to photograph viruses under the electron microscope is simple and fast reflective electron microscopy, which is known as "negative staining”. In order to concentrate actually existing structures, such as "phages” and "giant viruses”, from all the other components, which is then referred to as "isolation”, a standard technique, density gradient centrifugation, is used. The presence, appearance and purity of these isolated structures are made visible in the electron microscope by coating these particles with a metal-containing substance and the structures below appearing as shadows in the electron beam. The other part of the isolated particles, which were made visible by means of "negative staining”, are characterized biochemically. In the case of all phages and giant viruses, always intact and very long identically composed nucleic acids are found and the result of the biochemical characterization are documented.
In the case of all viruses that are classed as viruses by means of this "negative staining” technique, the following has happened. These particles are not enriched, cleaned and isolated with the density gradient centrifugation provided for this purpose, but rather sedimented on the bottom of the centrifuge tube by simple centrifugation, this is what is known as "pelleting” and then viewed under the electron microscope. The composition of such structures presented as viruses has never been determined biochemically up to today. With this easily verifiable and comprehensible statement based on all publications by virologists, in which structures in the supervision electron microscopy are reported as viruses, the virologists have also refuted this argument of the virus-existence claim simply and elegantly - without noticing it - themselves .
6. Electron microscope images, which are issued as viruses, are known typical artifacts or cell structures
Virologists publish a variety of electron microscope images of structures that they claim to be viruses. They conceal the fact that ALL of these recordings are only typical structures of dying cell cultures or represent protein-fat-soap-bubbles made in the laboratory and have NEVER been photographed in humans / animals / plants or liquids from them.
Researchers other than virologists refer to the same structures that virologists claim to be viruses, either as typical cell components such as villi (amoeba-like protuberances with which cells attach to the ground and move), as exosomes or “virus-like particles”. This is another independent proof that the statements of the virologists about seeing viruses under the electron microscope have been scientifically refuted.
7. The animal experiments of the virologists refute the virus-existence claims
Virologists conduct animal studies to prove that the substances they work with are viruses and can cause disease. Every single publication in which such animal experiments were carried out clearly shows that the way the animals are treated produced exactly the symptoms reported as the effect of the virus. It can be seen from each of these publications that no control experiments were carried out in which the animals were treated in the same way with sterilized starting material.
These two obvious facts are refuted by the virologists, who claim that they found the presence and effects of viruses in animal experiments.
It is now necessary to end the Corona crisis and turn it into an opportunity for all to make these clear, easily comprehensible and verifiable refutations of virology public and effective. These refutations become effective, for example, when appropriate legal remedies are used against virologists in the judiciary and the results are made public. We will inform you via our science-plus mailing list if we have to report results that are ready for decision.
In my name, I guarantee that anyone who would like to check these statements on any “disease-causing virus” will come to exactly the same conclusions if they are able to speak English and have read the methods. Precautionary note: As long as the corona crisis continues, my colleagues and I only answer inquiries regarding alleged so-called corona and measles viruses. For inquiries about all other “viruses” during the Corona period, I refer to the articles that have been published in the WissenschektivenPlus magazine since 2003.
Please keep in mind that the highest court-confirmed judgment in the measles virus trial has removed the basis of the entirity of virology. Not only that, it has been judicially established and is therefore part of German case law that the publication of the central method of virology on June 1, 1954, in which the unintentional and unnoticed killing of cells in the laboratory used as evidence of the existence of disease-causing viruses, in the year 2016, no longer proves the existence of a virus!
The corona crisis has increased the chance that the judgment of the measles virus case alone can turn around the ‘good-bad’ thinking that dominates today in biology, medicine, society and the state. Perhaps the application of one, several or all of the seven arguments listed above to SArS-CoV-2 is enough to put an end to the predictable dynamics of the global corona hysteria and the profiteering from test procedures and vaccines. With regard to the measles virus case and in general, I refer you to the Corona_Fakten internet site on the telegram portal. There is a very good summary of what is going on with the importance of the measles virus case and other articles that are very good.
My optimism that the Corona crisis will prove to be an opportunity for everyone is based on § 1 infection protection laws, abbreviated ifSg. in § 1 ifSg “Purpose of the law” is in sentence (2): “The necessary cooperation and cooperation of federal, state and local authorities, doctors, veterinarians, hospitals, scientific institutions and other parties involved should be in accordance with the current status medical and epidemiological science and technology are designed and supported. The responsibility of the owners and managers of community facilities, food companies, health facilities and individuals in the prevention of communicable diseases should be made clear and encouraged. “
All Corona measures and ordinances also Corona laws, are exclusively based on the Infection Protection Act (ifSg). However, since the “target provision in § 1 ifSg” should be designed and supported according to the current state of medical and epidemiological science and technology” was refuted by the published statements of the virologists themselves and proven to be anti-scientific, all corona measures are missing , Regulations and laws provide the legal basis to apply.
Nobody from the agencies and heads of community facilities, food businesses, health facilities and of the individual, i.e. every citizen who is affected by laws, is allowed to carry out or tolerate corona measures and ordinances if they have recognized and tolerated in §
1, sentence (2) can prove that virologists have no scientific evidence for the existence of disease-causing viruses, but have refuted themselves through their own actions and publications.
As long as the obligation to scientific research in § 1 ifSg remains, it is possible, with reference to § 1 ifSg, to successfully present evidence of the baselessness, lawlessness, harmfulness and immorality of all Corona measures, ordinances and laws in court. The majority of the judges are honest and conscientious and follow law, because otherwise an open dictatorship would have ruled this country for a long time and is making itself more and more visible, using pseudo-scientific and refuted arguments from virology and medicine.
Please note the following when you do this: The majority of the population believes in the existence/workings of pathogenic viruses and the positive effects of vaccines. To put it very drastically: Anyone who believes cancer is the effect of a misunderstood principle of evil also believes in metastases and believes in “flying metastases”, aka viruses. The suffering experienced directly and indirectly by almost every person with the negative consequences of cancer diagnoses and their severe treatments runs deep and has a profound effect. Please take into account in your education and your actions that this directly and indirectly experienced suffering alone has created and strengthened the feeling, the certainty in people, that there are dangerous and fatal diseases and viruses. Note That from these and other experiences the resulting view that only our state and its specialists are able to deal with it and to be allowed to deal with it. This way you can avoid doing the opposite. This is especially important when dealing with doctors, whom we all need.
For example, I explain to every questioning person that there is a better system of knowledge that (in a positive sense) scientifically explains the processes that lead to illness and healing and that healing crises can occur and healing barriers can have an effect. In order to be able to accept this new perspective, however, it is often a prerequisite that the previous explanatory system based on the cell theory is recognized as refuted.
The Corona crisis is a unique opportunity for this and the clear call to stand up for life and the three universal human ideals of freedom, equality and fraternity, i.e. the social tripartite of human communities. (See the article in this issue of w + 4/2020, “The social Tripartite”.)