Steve Kirsch is offering a million dollar bet to the "viruses don't exist" tards

Terms are here

[link to stevekirsch.substack.com (secure)]

100 000 euro to whoever can present a study that proves the existence of the measles virus. it's been out since 2011. and been to court.

there are no proofs. there is no scientific basis for the virus theory.

The judges of the bet will be selected from JAMS using the three next available mediators.

THAT HAS FAIR WRITTEN ALL OVER IT.

IN A FAIR CONTEST THE ONLY PROOF YOU NEED IS TO HAVE THE ONES CLAIMING THAT VIRUSES EXIST, SHOW YOU ONE.

LET'S SEE IT.

Have a link for that?

Here are images of viruses.

[link to www.rki.de (secure)]

[link to wissenschafftplus.de (secure)]

oh that's funny. ha ha.

That's not a link.
I'm not downloading a pdf in a foreign language.

of course.

but have you please also a picture of a unicorn? it would mean much to me.

I dunno about 2) but 1) is a risky bet, good luck!

Consider the Hot Dirty Hooker Paradox:

"plenty of people who believe in you because you represent the truth"


Nice sarcasm.. this guy really thinks that the truth is defined by large numbers of people believing it... Come on man.

He should know better.
You can't prove something isn't, only that it is.

Its a bullshit offer.

They pick out proteins from the leftover genetic material of their chemical process of "isolation and purification" a "virus". The same protiens are found when the process is ran on healthy or toxic cells.

The catch is, their definition is their definition.

This is like asking, for those who don't believe in smackletoggits, I will give you a million dollars to prove that they it doesn't exist. Ok, what is a smackletoggit? Well, it is an invisible particle that we use a faulty test to isolate and find. It causes people to get hungry, we kniw that. We don't know the mechanism but we have a guess, we find smackletoggits in everyone, and everyone gets hungry at times, many times people get hungry at the same time. So we know smackletoggits are real, we have made pictures of them using computers, see, look at these proteins we found in everyone who gets hungry.

So you can't disprove they exist. You can say they aren't the reason people get hungry and argue that point, but they are creating an idea and simply stating it is how this has to work.

Virology is pseudoscience.

Viruses exist.

Duh.

That doesn't mean all the relentless is true

especially when our leaders are godless evil.


.

Viruses exist.

Therefore I should let them inject me?

Kirsch... huh...

therea an easy answer

It looks like Lee Merritt is accepting the offer.

She's an orthopedic surgeon so i don't know why she thinks she's an expert on viruses.

I can't stand to listen to that dummkopf and hate her voice.

I had a friendly discussion with Patrick Gunnels about whether viruses exist. He thinks they don't. I think they do. After 90 minutes, I heard nothing that changed my mind.

[link to stevekirsch.substack.com (secure)]

"Koch’s postulates" and blah, blah, blah.

The problem is there are no "experts in virology". Fhey are all educated morons, totally brainwashed.

Did you know that George Washington died because they used a technique in which they bled him out, as they thought at the time that bleeding improved health?

Yeah. This is that. Except virology was pushed so the Rockefellers could make insane profits off vaccines. And depop in the process.

You're talking about the Stefan Lanka case, WHICH HE LOST ON THE SCIENTIFIC MERITS.

[link to en.m.wikipedia.org (secure)]

Six papers blew his "measles virus doesn't exist" claim out of the water.

But he insisted that it all had to be done in one paper.
Just bullshit.

If you had to breakdown all of your research on viruses, and why you believe they exist, then what would you list as the top 3 proofs of their existence?

Remember, this is a small list of PROOF, not computer modeling, not someone's opinion, but actual proof.

Koch's postulates exist for a reason.

1.


2.


3.

Viruses are parasites. Herpes is a parasite. Ebola is a parasite.

He has to go check on Wikipedia first. You know, his go to, for proof.

Patrick politely decimated him.

Then what about today's earlier thread "take the right antibiotic and learn the diffrnc. btwn a virus & microbe" or whatever... ??

If you can understand this post, you can grasp why virology itself is a shit science.

You can see bacteria once there are enough of them.

I would assume the same would hold true for a virus, or is this assumption in error?