Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Believe it or not, Viruses may not exist at all!

page: 2
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by redled
 


AIDS exists but it is not a virus: it is a syndrome. The syndrome is attributed to a sub-viral cause (retro-virus).

We are not questioning the existence of the syndrome, but the sub-microscopical agent which may actually be a myth.




posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 12:07 AM
link   
Try this on..The virus is really some malevolent code put in to hijack the good code and disrupt/disorganize it. You think those Chinese hackers are behind it?

Maybe I have been reading too much about how this world may be a 3D holographic projection...possibly.



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by TH3ON3
 


Uhh... wow, that threw me off. Was reading about Viruses that affect biological mass and then this...

not computer viruses, duders...



posted on Jan, 19 2009 @ 12:32 AM
link   
i agree with the op.

and i certainly believe that the disease can be esoteric in nature or not within the physical realm

if one has abundant energy thru qi gong or internal energy cultivation like meditiation, then one will not get ill

go out there and start doing some qi gong people!!!



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
If this theory is true, it lends credence to the theories put forth in this video.


Google Video Link



Also, there is good reason to believe the AIDS epidemic in Africa may be a fraud:




According to the World Health Organization (WHO) and UNAIDS, 42 million people around the world are infected with HIV, and nearly 22 million people in Africa have died of AIDS. But AIDS isn't a single disease; it's a collection of diseases. When people are said to die of AIDS, they're known to die of a particular disease or condition, such as pneumonia, tuberculosis, malaria or basic malnutrition. AIDS researchers claim that HIV plays a role in the development of these illnesses, but in spite of this claim, 20 years of AIDS research has failed to prove causation between HIV infection and any so-called AIDS disease (as explored in “The AIDS Debate” parts one and two). So why do we call them AIDS deaths?

In the US, AIDS is defined as a collection of 29 previously-known conditions including yeast infections, hepatitis, the flu, pneumonia, tuberculosis and Kaposi's Sarcoma. These conditions are not known to be caused by HIV. Nevertheless, the one thing that classifies any one of these conditions as AIDS is a positive HIV-antibody test.

But even if HIV was found to cause these previously known conditions, a problem remains. The HIV-antibody tests do not diagnose actual HIV-infection. Instead, they look for non-specific antibody reactions in your blood to proteins in the HIV-test. The test manufacturers claim that the proteins stand in for HIV, but in reality, none of the test proteins have been proven to be specific to HIV. These tests are, in fact, so nonspecific that they cross-react with nearly 70 other documented conditions, including the flu, previous vaccinations, blood transfusions, arthritis, alcoholic hepatitis, drug use, yeast infections and even pregnancy, as well as conditions endemic in Africa: tuberculosis, parasitic infection, leprosy and malaria. Because no HIV test can actually find HIV, not a single HIV-test has been approved by the FDA for diagnosing HIV-infection.

In light of this nonspecific, cross-reacting test, how does the World Health Organization (WHO) diagnose AIDS in Africa?

Simple: they don't require any test at all. In 1985, the WHO created a new definition of AIDS for African nations and third world countries. The WHO's “Bangui Definition” allows Africans with common physical symptoms including diarrhea, fever, weight loss, itching and coughing to be automatically designated as AIDS patients, with no HIV test. But these very symptoms define life for the majority of Africans who lack essentials like sufficient food, safe drinking water, proper sanitation and basic medical care. These symptoms are also synonymous with the biggest killers on the continent: malaria, infectious diarrhea and tuberculosis.

source



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 04:17 PM
link   
Whatever it is that AIDS/HIV is, one thing for sure is that it came from the Hepatitis B vaccine.

Take a look at this map of the vaccine sites and HIV rates

HIV came from Hapatitis B vaccine

It was a clear plan to depopulate Africa, but a failed one



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
Are you people F-ing kiddin me!?!!?



I, too, have worked professionally with Viruses in the Lab - and they are WELL understood!

Trust me - they exist and work just like any competent current college level textbook describes them.

And they are really frikkin' interesting - educate yourselves and learn more about them - and Biology in general.

Sheeshh!!!



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 05:14 PM
link   
reply to post by ReelView
 


I am by no means a molecular biologist...

However, a thought occurred to me.

Has anyone seen these viruses doing their dirty work in action? Because if you do not have 100% proof that what you're seeing under the microscope is the same thing that is destroying everything, then how can you claim the sickness is coming from that entity?

I guess what I mean to say... isn't it possible that what you're seeing under the microscope is actually an EFFECT of the sickness and not the cause? If it is not possible, then please explain how you know and watch these viruses do their damage.

Thanks and enjoy.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot

Originally posted by redled
...We have recognised viruses under microscopes...


Just a minor point, but no one has viewed living viruses under microscope in a VERY long time. Dr. Royal Raymond Rife developed a microscope whereby you could see living viruses, but it lost out to GE's development of the Electron Microscope.


That would be because no viruses are alive.



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 05:55 PM
link   
I posted this before and got similar kinds of naive responses. What the doctor is pointing out is that what passes for the proof of a virus as a photographed RNA strand turns out to be an unreliable somewhat random product of the junk in the petri dish. With the best equipment and dedicated research he couldn't find a virus and he's not stupid, he's the one in a million that can actually think!

Yes, "something" causes an illness like AIDS for example, but what that is, is not really known. Selling solutions to go with causes is big business, control and extermination. We know that vaccines have been used to claim cures to illness only to cause worse illness. They can't do that if they don't first claim they know what the problem is and have then isolated the solution. They can't be the heros, saviors, deliverers.

There is another guy from Japan with research lead him to believe the body manufactures illness itself. I believe that this is very correct. The idea being that the body seems to be a kind of self generating laboratory that manufactures on demand illnesses suitable to introduce karmic conditions of the individual. Think of it this way, your body and mind are there to facilitate your exhausting imperfections so it's very natural that it would facilitate the introduction of what ever it takes to do that. This maximizes your efforts to exhaust karma from both desires and paybacks. Naturally, people are cowards and not willing to think or understand or face the reality of their existence here. So denial of such likely realities meets with the usual opposition (at least at first).



posted on Jan, 22 2010 @ 08:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReelView
I posted this before and got similar kinds of naive responses. What the doctor is pointing out is that what passes for the proof of a virus as a photographed RNA strand turns out to be an unreliable somewhat random product of the junk in the petri dish. With the best equipment and dedicated research he couldn't find a virus and he's not stupid, he's the one in a million that can actually think!

Yes, "something" causes an illness like AIDS for example, but what that is, is not really known. Selling solutions to go with causes is big business, control and extermination. We know that vaccines have been used to claim cures to illness only to cause worse illness. They can't do that if they don't first claim they know what the problem is and have then isolated the solution. They can't be the heros, saviors, deliverers.

There is another guy from Japan with research lead him to believe the body manufactures illness itself. I believe that this is very correct. The idea being that the body seems to be a kind of self generating laboratory that manufactures on demand illnesses suitable to introduce karmic conditions of the individual. Think of it this way, your body and mind are there to facilitate your exhausting imperfections so it's very natural that it would facilitate the introduction of what ever it takes to do that. This maximizes your efforts to exhaust karma from both desires and paybacks. Naturally, people are cowards and not willing to think or understand or face the reality of their existence here. So denial of such likely realities meets with the usual opposition (at least at first).


I believe that this is a more right point of view than the current understanding by scientists who only know what they know based on the extremely flawed scientific method.

And without trying to derail the thread, I'll say that what you say is also not 100% true. There are times when it happens and it is actually not because of sin. Jesus said to the family who asked why theirs was made sick, and He replied, "It is nothing wrong that he has done or that you have done. It is so that the works of God may be made manifest through him."

Careful to think that everytime you get sick, it is a punishment! But also careful to think that you are undeserving...

Be safe, friends.



posted on Jan, 29 2010 @ 04:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by ReelView
Check out this link -- www.neue-medizin.com...

Seems Viruses may not even exist. Of course, there are communicable illnesses but the label of "Virus" is apparently a tool of you know who for you know what.


i made many 'no virus' threads, people normally bully it, yea there is no such thing as 'virus'



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 04:55 AM
link   
reply to post by predisposed
 


and i with u
and the op



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 04:59 AM
link   
reply to post by ReelView
 


u my friend are a #ing genius
no lie



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 05:23 AM
link   
I'll go with option A and not believe it. If there were no viruses, we couldn't isolate them. If we couldn't isolate them we couldn't create vaccines. If we couldn't create vaccines that target those non-existent viruses, chances are your mother would have had rubella, or you would have been born with polio, or you'd be dead now from smallpox.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 06:06 AM
link   
I'm amused by all the "i work in a lab with viruses daily!" comments here by people who really do not know what they talk about.

Several foundations have promised well over a million dollars in total to the first person who proves the isolation of HIV.

Are you all so rich that you won't take a sample, isolate the "so well understood" virus from there, and cash in and become a millionaire?



..disinformation agents...




posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 06:35 AM
link   
reply to post by above
 


Really? Then it should be very easy for you to provide a source to prove that. Otherwise it's just more disinformation.



posted on Jun, 29 2010 @ 07:49 AM
link   
reply to post by mythatsabigprobe
 


i believe him instantly because i blieve 2 have read it somwhere or somthing
but a link would be nice...
would hate it if i had 2 look it up myself



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 08:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by sir_chancealot

Originally posted by redled
...We have recognised viruses under microscopes...


Just a minor point, but no one has viewed living viruses under microscope in a VERY long time. Dr. Royal Raymond Rife developed a microscope whereby you could see living viruses, but it lost out to GE's development of the Electron Microscope.


I recognize the name Rife. I believe that technology he developed has been suppressed by the powers that be if I am remembering correctly.

reply to post by ReelView
 


This is absolutely fascinating and thought-provoking. Thank you for opening up a whole new area of inquiry for me.


Originally posted by predisposed
if one has abundant energy thru qi gong or internal energy cultivation like meditiation, then one will not get ill


I am beginning to think that maybe there are bacteria but not viruses and even with bacteria, a healthy body will not become diseased by “catching” anything from bacteria. My understanding is that Pasteur, near the time of his death, made the statement that the important thing is the environment of the person’s body, not the bacteria – or something to that effect.



posted on Jun, 30 2010 @ 08:46 AM
link   
So if I read this correct what is being said is that the VIRUS situation is more or less normal diseases that have been within the human structure for a long time. But since we have KNOWLEDGE of these microorganisims now we have begin to fear these microorganisims. And with the fear embedded within our minds we have begun to let the FEAR kill us off due to us having the mindstate that something bad is inside us and will harm or kill us and having these negative thoughts can cause 1 to die or become ill. Sorta like if THE KNOWLEDGE OF WHAT IS CALLED DEATH was never introduced to the human mindstate then human mindstate would not consider dying at all! This thread does sorta make sense..





new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join