from listening to the Racaniello videos he seems to be genuinely deluded. I think there may be many things we have assumed that don't stand up on investigation. I agree that the trauma these assumptions have made in recent times is absolutely mind blowing.
from listening to the Racaniello videos he seems to be genuinely deluded. I think there may be many things we have assumed that don't stand up on investigation. I agree that the trauma these assumptions have made in recent times is absolutely mind blowing.
The Rac has interviewed the Dasazk which you don't get to do unless you are part of that team. About 2.5 yrs ago I wrote him thinking I would enlighten him that a genome was only made from a computer, he replied something like, "You don't know Jack Shit!" So he's a made man, not deluded.
He has bought into the paradigm. Stefan Lanka also bought into the paradigm, but later decided to question some of the basic assumptions and started reaching different conclusions about what virology was seeing or not seeing.
ha, ha. It is amazing how detailed they get into describing various structures of viruses, phylogenetic trees, folding proteins, functionality, etc. but there is such an enormous gap between theory and reality. How is this research of benefit? It's like the arguments in the Middle Ages of how many angels could fit on the head of a pin. Might be fun for the scholars, but of no benefit to anyone else.
We all grew up with the paradigm. It was wallpaper to me. One of those things you believe without realizing there is an alternative. But reading Mike Yeadon as he began to convert to тАШno virusтАЩ, step by step, blew my mind. I had no idea no virus had ever been isolated. I had no idea how absurd their method for тАШprovingтАЩ a virus was. Once you look into it objectively the facade crumbles. It doesnтАЩt take long either. An hour or two of reading.
from listening to the Racaniello videos he seems to be genuinely deluded. I think there may be many things we have assumed that don't stand up on investigation. I agree that the trauma these assumptions have made in recent times is absolutely mind blowing.
The Rac has interviewed the Dasazk which you don't get to do unless you are part of that team. About 2.5 yrs ago I wrote him thinking I would enlighten him that a genome was only made from a computer, he replied something like, "You don't know Jack Shit!" So he's a made man, not deluded.
ah interesting, and how rude of him.
He has bought into the paradigm. Stefan Lanka also bought into the paradigm, but later decided to question some of the basic assumptions and started reaching different conclusions about what virology was seeing or not seeing.
yes https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z4ZMZvSpb1U have you seen how Lanka explains virology in 5 seconds?
ha, ha. It is amazing how detailed they get into describing various structures of viruses, phylogenetic trees, folding proteins, functionality, etc. but there is such an enormous gap between theory and reality. How is this research of benefit? It's like the arguments in the Middle Ages of how many angels could fit on the head of a pin. Might be fun for the scholars, but of no benefit to anyone else.
We all grew up with the paradigm. It was wallpaper to me. One of those things you believe without realizing there is an alternative. But reading Mike Yeadon as he began to convert to тАШno virusтАЩ, step by step, blew my mind. I had no idea no virus had ever been isolated. I had no idea how absurd their method for тАШprovingтАЩ a virus was. Once you look into it objectively the facade crumbles. It doesnтАЩt take long either. An hour or two of reading.