27 Comments

You deserve a medal, Mike. You'll go down in history :)

Expand full comment
author

Thanks Christine! We have both been through quite a few of these types of encounters, haven't we? 😉

Expand full comment

More than I care of remember! xoxo

Expand full comment

Truth! You're doing such great and gracious work that is truly making a difference! "My Tail Number Is...I don't know, and I don't care, so I don't want to know"!

Expand full comment
Apr 28, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

I totally agree, Christine. You and he both, along with so many others who have weathered the slings and arrows of the twitterverse and the FB universe and the other virtual debate halls.

The A #1 difference between someone defending a defenseless idea and someone arguing from an honest position (even if it's flawed) is those insults and sarcastic jabs! Thanks for leading the way!

Expand full comment
Apr 21, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

Not only amazingly clear as always, but also amazingly funny. The no-virus team is truly a joyful place. Thanks for making be laugh (I'm still laughing - especially about the monkey-sex part).

Expand full comment
author

Thanks Claus! I definitely appreciate it. The monkey sex thing had me laughing quite a bit as well. I couldn't believe he used that as a comparison. I guess this explains why the kidney's of monkey's are used in cell cultures... 🤔

Expand full comment
Apr 21, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

Exactly!!!

Expand full comment
Apr 22, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

Mike, I want to thank you for your brilliant and persistent reponses to people who, it seems, choose not to think.

Of course, there are people who DO choose to think to turn the steering wheel if they notice they're headed directly toward a bridge abutment at speed. Usually, men will pause to think TWICE before deciding to flirt outrageously with their boss's wife at the christmas party.

But so often, people refuse to think if a pet idea they favor is at risk.

You are performing heroic and valuable service, for which I am grateful. I am not exaggerating.

Expand full comment
author

Wow! Thanks so much for the compliments Rider. It is tiring conversing with these people but I do think that there can be some value gained from it. As long as there is value in these exchanges, I will continue to try and squeeze what I can from them. 😉

Expand full comment
Apr 24, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

Aa long as I'm talking, let me offer a small point of criticism I hope might help. I would not waste time responding to contentious people, ever, beyond a single response suggesting they read what you have already written regarding their claims. They'll write something insulting in response while making false accusations. I'd then block them with no comment or warning.

I would spend the time you save on marketing outreach, including finding sites that will publish your articles, or will publish an article you design to pull readers to your site. I would not spend time with medical professionals, since they'll almost always prefer defending their "property" (false theory they've been schooled in) to the truth. Maybe some alternative practitioners would be receptive, but mostly they'll worry about public and "patient" reactions. Try instead to reach regular people without a personal stake in virology--people who will gain a lot personally knowing what is and is not true about this subject.

The subject not that hard to understand, in its basics, although you lay it all out brilliantly. People who value truth and can think will come along with you.

Expand full comment
author

I think that is great advice Rider. 🙂

Expand full comment

While I can agree that it's sometimes futile to argue with these people that seem to have some personal stake in being right, I do like the back and forth which helps me to clarify what Mike is saying about the entire field(or myth) of virology. I'm just amazed at the need for some to cling to their old beliefs rather than seriously look at what he is saying, as if accepting this newer idea will destroy their entire world. The people he was having his Twitter discussion with didn't even seem to be in the field of virology as some of their replies appeared rather juvenile.

Expand full comment
author

Hi Cousin Clem. They do come across very juvenile. It is tedious trying to have a rational conversation with them. My only hope is that anyone looking in from the outside notice the difference between how they respond and how we do.

Expand full comment
Apr 24, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

I'd like to pass along a link of something you've written to people I write to about this from time to time. Any suggestions? I want to get more people to your website. For instance, I send them a link to Mark Bailey's A Farewell to Virology. I'd like to be able to do the same with respect to something you have written.

Also, maybe it would be worth your time to submit an article you've written to Unlimitedhangout.com. There are lots of readers there who think for themselves and some would be receptive to the points you raise.

Expand full comment
author

If it's for anyone new to the subject, this is always a good place to start.

https://viroliegy.com/category/intro-to-viroliegy/

If there are other topics you are interested in sharing, I can try to come up with different articles. Thanks for sharing! 🙂

Expand full comment
May 1, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

Thanks Mike, I will endeavor to make good use of it!

Expand full comment
Apr 28, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

Hi Rider, have you seen Whitney broach this topic? The no virus team looked at this a few weeks ago where Whitney essentially mirrored the views of others on a panel (Derick Broze, Ryan Christian and someone else) to say that she is neither expert enough nor interested enough in the topic and that is why, despite taking criticism from supporters, she has not and will not be looking into the issue. It is a truly bizarre take. She wasn't an expert on Epstein until she dove into it. She is an investigative journalist of high caliber and frankly the issues with virology are not rocket science. More importantly it is cornerstone to the entire covid narrative and scam which she is more than interested in looking into.

Anyway, suffice to say I am sure she has heard of Mike and that his articles would not be published based on her attitude. There's always hope i guess.

Expand full comment

I didn't realize Whitney was editor, my mistake. I thought she only submitted articles there. Too bad.

Expand full comment

Yeah I'm pretty sure it's essentially her own site and she just commissions selected writers to contribute. Quite the ironic name for the website when she talks a lot of important truth then completely ignores this topic! Caution....items may be less unlimited than they appear!

Expand full comment

Whitney comes from the left, which sometimess seems to bias her analysis and interpretations. I formed this opinion in reading vol one of her book . Also, she's out on the edge already and may (my guess) worry about losing support or regard from many of her followers. I hope she'll continue to learn.

Expand full comment
Apr 23, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

You have the patience of Job. I am so impressed with how you deal with the incredible hubris displayed, and the almost incomprehensible gibberish some of these 'scientists' spew at you. How you keep track of their running in nonsensical circles amazes me. Great read, thanks Mike :)

Expand full comment
author

Thank you Rocky! It is not a great deal of fun trying to pin them down to a consistent topic of conversation. They definitely enjoy a good circular argument as employing as many red herrings as possible. 😉

Expand full comment

The monkeys-having-sex metaphor is apt in describing these chu(i)mps and the proliferation of their nonsense. It’s really mind-blowing how the absence of basic reasoning is so universal! Where did all these people come from? Kudos to you, Mike, for battling these virus-worshipping apes and their illogic. But one suggestion: despite my name-calling here, I would avoid playing their game with any “insults” during these exchanges, which includes even crying-laughing emojis tagged at the ends of lines. These combative types really are like animals, and any jabs at them (even while their ad hominems are far worse) can only trigger them. Stay civil through the ugliest moments and to the bitter end, as difficult as that may be. It’s your logical argumentation that is the key here, and if you take the high road in terms of civil discourse, you might actually win one or two of these “lovely souls” over to our side.

Expand full comment
Apr 28, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

Maybe instead of aiming directly at the counterparty, play to those reading the thread. Interested lurkers are your best bet for gaining traction and changing minds, not those in the corrupt medical establishment.

Expand full comment
Apr 28, 2023·edited Apr 28, 2023Liked by Mike Stone

Mike, I think some of these people are deception operatives. They seem to want to confuse and water down your information not to necessarily win a logic argument. If their goal is to leave those many persons who don't really get it about cell cultures to begin with to question the issue to any degree, then they have accomplished their mission. Regardless if they are on a mission or just argumentative, you might want to make a "standard one time reply" that says your logic, says you wont engage in it further, and will ban any posts that make attacks. I see Rider gave you similar advice below.

Expand full comment