Investments. These people are ideologically invested in the virology narrative, they have believed it all their lives, doggedly cling to it. They are emotionally invested, fearing that any admission of being fundamentally wrong about it would undermine their legitimacy among their followers, given how often and repeatedly they have spewed this narrative to their fans. And more than a few of them are themselves financially invested in this narrative, offering "alternative treatments" to "viruses," or their sponsors/funders are. That's the hidden agenda.
Well said Jeffrey! I have a feeling that the political aspirations and motivations are also a factor in not touching the "virus" topic. They can't alienate their potential voters. 😉
Oh yeah, Bobby Jr. "We got a presidency to win." And the people he's fronting for have a Blockchain digital slavery they wish to herd us into under the guise of "take back your freedom." I need to get that Bobby Jr article written.
Agreed. They're a completely fake 'truth' movement or opposition to the Rockefeller medical establishment. When you reduce their position to the fundamentals, all they're asking for is for the establishment to say it made 'mistakes' and promise to do 'better' next round of medical tyranny, and they'd celebrate that they'd 'won' the battle and all is good. It's literally a sick joke to anyone who's paying attention, and is serving to keep a lot of people who know something's wrong but don't understand what in the grip of the massive Rockefeller fraud of germ theory and virus theory.
The germ theory team keeps playing whack a mole in the courts while the truth that the emperor has no clothes brings down the whole house of cards. Then knowing the Rockefeller medicine lie helps everyone wonder what else they’ve been lied to about bringing down the criminal activities of the psychopaths trying to gain control. The big myth needs big exposure. Perhaps they are not up to the task.
I agree 110% Ali. There is no benefit in not exposing the lie, especially here and now at this moment in time. If ever there was a clear signal that people are in need of learning the truth, the last 3 years are it.
So Derrick sees belief in politics as not-solution-focused... yet chose to run for Mayor of Houston anyways. Interesting. And according to Derrick, pumping people up without any solutions "feels" solution-focused. I think I'm noticing a pattern with Derrick, pivoting to "feelings" when he has nothing logical to say.
I think you are spot on there Christine. I'm all for a good speaker, but "pumping people up," as Del does, is not a solution. Giving people valuable information dispelling a centuries old fraud, as Alec did, most definitely is solution focused. I'm not sure how Derrick can not see how ridiculous his position is.
There are a lot of people in the so-called "truth" and "freedom" movement who are quite clearly perpetuating fear-porn to get clicks or sell products and that doesn't sit well with me. They use the same tactics that those they oppose do, with this "holier than thou" ego. I used to be in the community with Derrick, TLAV, and Whitney... but I started to see it for what it was and decided to abruptly remove myself from it because it didn't seem very productive - and some of Ryan's comments when myself and another guy were questioning him on germ theory also didn't sit well with me.... basically its too much and no one will believe it 🙄 what a ridiculous cop out.
And then I disengaged completely from that crowd. Calling themselves an investigative journalist, and espousing the importance of truth & freedom above all else, but making the types of comments they do about germ theory & virology is such a blatant contradiction. Especially when some of us were hand-feeding valuable resources to look into it themselves. I typically try to include a "short version" and long-version because I know peoples time & attention-span varies. Ive lost respect for those folks and the way myself and others have been treated, when we engaged in a respectful manner, has earned them a spot on my shit-list. I have no desire to have them on "our side" anymore honestly. Their clicks and their ego are more important than honesty & integrity.
That was EXACTLY the point I tried to make in Proton Magic's post, but then I got called a "fucking idiot" and "dumb fuck" multiple times by Derrick for pointing out what I thought was quite obvious hypocrisy 😂
Yes, lets leave the foundation of this house of cards intact! Lets give the Pharmaceutical mafia a continuing reason to exist. Let's equip future generations with unending fear of The Germ. There's a solution worth fighting for! /s
I've read everything I can and - although I still have some questions - my conclusion is that at the very least, virology is a complete and utter mess. Yet, I empathise with Broze in this conversation more than you.
Are you curious why, how you are alienating people who agree with you or might agree with you somewhat? This is a war with multiple fronts, a complex one, that will take place over a period of time, with many battles along the way. Your approach is rather like if you work for a company and the majority shareholder CEO has placed his son who is not competent in a key position. Everyone agrees - so does this mean the only solution is to walk into his office the next morning and demand his son be fired? Is this not just the correct course of action but obviously, without any disussion required, the correct course of action? Is anyone who has another approach a shill, living a lie etc? Of course not. Reasonable people can decide to keep plugging away at illuminating various issues and hope eventually the CEO will see this for himself.
You however don't see it like this - anything other than pounding on the CEO's desk telling him his son should be fired is not good enough. Maybe that's the correct course, maybe it's not - but your blind spot is that you think it is just obviously the correct course of action. I - and Broze and many others - don't agree.
I'm not quite certain how you view me as demanding. I'm not asking Derrick to do anything other than to present our position accurately, especially as Derrick says that he will continue to ask others about it. I also fail to see how the "no virus" topic should not be included in the discussion in regard to bringing about solutions to the problems we face. Obviously, Derrick must see some benefit to asking about it, otherwise he would ignore the topic entirely and stop addressing it. As Derrick is an investigative journalist who wants to continue discussing the topic, it is his duty to present our position as accurately as possible without painting it as a "rabid angry crowd" that is a possible CIA psyop. If you want to view that as demanding, so be it. I see it as fair and objective reporting that journalists are supposed to uphold.
Yes the discussion "framework" has to be clear and kept so - in any important exchanges otherwise NOTHING will be achieved by either party. What has been lost here in the above exchanges...is not all parties are coming to the table with this same honorable intention to play/be fair - in a shared desire for better future outcomes. We see this self-sabotage happen too much...usually one party brings "baggage" the other's didn't. Then the "baggage" becomes the discussion focus and pulls all opportunity for growth in knowledge - away !
Hats off to you Mike and Alec for going the extra mile/s to bring it back to the table every time, each time.
I don't see that as a good analogy at all. Who's the CEO whose desk the "no virus" team is pounding on? It's more like we're trying to get out the word to the workers, customers, shareholders and the public at large that the product this company is supposedly selling doesn't actually exist. The invisible clothing on the emperor (or in this case, the invisible pathogens making people sick) are not just invisible, there's really and truly nothing there.
Yes, there are definitely people who agree that viruses are a cover story, who also express the opinion that health freedom advocates who don't agree are therefore "controlled opposition" or "pharma shills" or other unsavory types. That stance has never been promoted by anyone who's seen as a leader in this "no virus" camp, and in fact it has been cautioned against many times by those leaders.
I think my analogy was clear enough, I also wrote the point in plain clear analogy-free English - yet you both misinterpreted it. It's nothing to do with you being "demanding" and doesn't require there be a CEO's desk to bang on etc. So I think you both have a blind spot that prevents you seeing what I wrote, and no amount of words or explanation will help.
If multiple people didn't understand your analogy, perhaps it wasn't a very good one. It would be nice if you could clarify what you meant if you feel that we misunderstood you.
I used to subscribe to Derrick Broze's Telegram channel, and a few months ago he brought up something about "the virus" and I replied with a very mild disagreement and summary of why I do not believe that viruses exist. Several other people responded in support of what I wrote. Derrick argued, bringing up the "terrain and germ theory can both be true" notion, which I countered, and after a brief exchange he closed off the topic by saying that this discussion wasn't relevant to his page (even though he brought it up in the first place). He has done some great work, but his attitude seems to easily devolve to "I'm taking my ball and going home" when he feels like he is losing the game.
Hi Betsy, what you wrote here really sums up perfectly how I felt after my interaction with Derrick:
"his attitude seems to easily devolve to "I'm taking my ball and going home" when he feels like he is losing the game."
It is unfortunate when people, who could easily reach a larger audience with the truth about the fraud of germ theory/virology, are unwilling to invest the time to understand the position in order to do it justice when speaking about it. Instead, Broze (and Kennedy Jr./Bigtree, amongst others) are dismissing our position and, in Broze's case, badmouthing us while bringing the topic up. He could do so much good if he actually researched the topic and understood our position.
Over the years, I've had a few interactions with people who suffer from what I now understand to be Cluster B personality disorders - especially narcissists. What you have described fits with what I've noticed seems to be their characteristic behaviour:
When losing an argument, they either
1) change the subject, or
2) play the man, rather than the ball (which they then take and go home).
"...He could do so much good if he actually researched the topic and understood our position."
Perhaps you are giving Mr. Broze the benefit of the doubt, but reading his interaction here and with Proton, it seems he is well aware of the gist of the no-virus argument. But is instead going out of his way to dismiss/ridicule it. Which isn't very sincere approach to "researching/understanding" no virus position.
He frequently diverts to "pissed off teenager" when anyone challenges him - ive seen it consistently, over and over again. Its sad and kind of pathetic to watch (especially from someone who is running for political office.... big yikes!!!)
People like Broze and Bigtree are "career politicians" and warrior opportunists, not sincere researchers or teachers that have the slightest handle on solving this huge germ theory hoax mess that has allowed tyrants to completely derail human freedom and autonomy, not to mention common sense and awareness of reality. The reality is that you and you alone make yourself sick via your own voluntary lifestyle; primarily your diet in this modern century. Anyone who actually changes (not token alters) their diet over time (the only real experiment towards actual health, which is the elimination of all symptoms of dis-ease) can put the germ theory to rest once and for all. The trouble is that hardly anyone does this- instead they choose to pander to their social audiences hoping to increase their "sales value" for all kinds of products or services that support survival amidst the chaos. But there would be no chaos once everyone had a working understanding of what the germ theory of "infectious disease and contagion" and disease really was, and how simple it is to squash it. Of course, then all the Brozes and Bigtrees would be out of a job. Those who ACTUALLY educate the public, like Mike Stone and a tiny handful or others do not consider this their job. We all consider it our duty to humanity, money or no money, fame or no fame, notoriety or no notoriety.
Great article by Mike Stone. I think it's interesting that Del Bigtree who came out of the Dr Phil show may be a 'career politician' and is also from an 'entertainment' background. Apparently Norma Bigtree is Bigtree's mother and his last name is actually "Groverland." There is very little background on him otherwise that I can find. So is his role to entertain people and is this why Broze gets excited at the prospect of a "crowd pumper upper?" Entertainment?
"Norma Bigtree Groverland, Music Director and Minister Emeritus at Unity of Boulder, was born the middle child of three daughters to a Mohawk Native American Father and a Russian Immigrant Mother. Norman Bigtree was her father’s name and she was named after him (he had given up on having a boy, so she was named “Norma” Bigtree). She and her sisters became quite famous in the East as a singing, dancing trio called the “Bigtree Sisters.” Norma performed with her sisters all over New York State from the age of 4 until she went to New York City after attending two years at Syracuse University’s School of Music. She performed with Barry Manilow, Bernadtte Peters, etc, when she met Jack Groverland. Upon meeting him, they both embarked on a spiritual quest together, that has been the most rewarding life one could ever imagine."
Jun 16, 2023·edited Jun 16, 2023Liked by Mike Stone
Mike you are in the top ten of medical freedom fighters including Rappoport, Massey, Dr. Bailey and Celia Farber. In the unlikely event the tyrants were ever put on trial, you should be the number one witness against them in terms of scientific knowledge.
What is so difficult pushing back against germ theory is that the average person is content in accepting simplistic solutions to explain the cause of illness. The medical cartel has always known this.
To my mind the mainstream narrative has not only been about proffering simplistic explanations but outright laziness in thinking things through. They are lazy people who see themselves as saints!
Jun 16, 2023·edited Jun 17, 2023Liked by Mike Stone
What do the Chinese say? Did they really allow the Americans and their spies create a very dangerous viral pathogen in their territory? Are the Chinese that dumb and weak?
The Americans know the Chinese will never tell the truth about bioweapons research, which is why the virus is a cover story to never speak about what they really do, which has to do with poisons and antidotes.
They can’t bring the criminals to Justice with the gain of fiction story as there is no evidence. As you say Chinese will never allow inspection of their labs and everything done in our labs is “top security” as well. Very convenient cover story.
I personally take the view that "gain of function" represents an actual attempt to weaponise otherwise harmless, benign and naturally occurring nanoscale particles the scientists have misidentified as "virus" for the last 100 years. I believe they were unsuccessful:
"J.J. Couey's contributions to the debate also included discussing the role of Peter Daszak, Ralph Baric et al.’s gain-of-function research. What Couey suggests Daszak et al. were modifying was the inherent inert harmlessness of the nanoscale particles generated by Enders relieable and repeatable ‘viral’ propagation technique. Couey suggests that weaponised ‘gain-of-function’ of these otherwise harmless nanoscale particles represents intercellular communications noise, scrambling if you will, by bombarding the human body with meaningless RNA or DNA code (in the mRNA- and DNA-based COVID-19 vaccines particularly). This results in intercellular communications chaos within the human body, the consequences of which I think are ably demonstrated by the horrendous mRNA- and DNA-based COVID-19 vaccine harms across the globe. The psychopaths responsible for this mandated vaccination campaign and its accompanying corollary of propaganda and gaslighting have attempted to use gain-of-function research to turn these harmless nanoparticles into a biological weapon that interferes with the body’s own mysterious, internal RNA- and DNA-based communications mechanisms. I am not as confident as J.J. Couey that they have been successful. [29]"
Footnote 29: Couey repeatedly mentions the ‘release’ of ‘DNA viral clones,’ which PCR tests were able to pick up and thus ‘detect’ COVID-19 illness. I disagree with Couey’s assertion of DNA clones being released as bioweapons because these must be isolated, purified, biochemically characterised and genetically sequenced from a human sample prior to performing propagation just the same as any other ‘virus’. This, of course, has never been done: Val Turner’s objection at the beginning of this article still applies to Couey’s claims of ‘released’ DNA viral clones, too.
"weaponize" could be as simple as adding some poison ivy nectar or any other toxic substance to the nanoparticle mixture.
I could take a glass of water and "weaponize" it by adding a few drops of arsenic to it. A sexual deviant could "weaponize" a drink at a bar by adding Rohypnol to the drink. No virus needed. Virus synonym actually means poison.
My point is the gain of function narrative is blown out of proportion (for fear-inducing purposes).
I heard Del Bigtree's speech at VaxCon 23 back in April. He and at least one other highlighted speaker at that conference dismissed the "no virus" idea as absurd/ unimportant/ wrong (I really don't want to put words in their mouths; at the very least they expressed a negative view of it.) On the other hand, he and several of the other speakers went into great detail about how the respected scientific journals are often just plain wrong, and particularly how they have been wrong on top of wrong about various aspects of "covid." They had numerous slides showing screen shots from those journals, in order to show how they were contradictory and just wrong.
I was struck by the huge disconnect: they distrust, and are telling their followers to distrust those journals, when it comes to what they have to say about covid illness, its seriousness and "spread"; about the "safety and efficacy" of the shots, even about the basic value of vaccines in general (I think it was Pierre Kory who implied that). Yet, they accept at face value, without analyzing the articles or the studies that the articles report on, the ones titled "Isolation of SARS-CoV-2 ...."
They seem to be comfortable critiquing the articles that are based on statistics, but not the ones claiming to be based on science. It's really disappointing and unfortunate.
Yes Rose, it is a very odd disconnect. They seem to actively avoid critiquing the papers claiming the existence and pathogenicity of microbes, and yet on the other hand, they will attempt to tear apart any vaccine study showing safety and efficacy. If the focused on the core issue, i.e. the lack of scientific evidence proving germ theory, they wouldn't even need to touch on vaccines. The whole concept goes down with germ theory.
I had an exchange with Broze and I pointed him to the Lanka control experiment.
That's the experiment that scientifically confirmed it for me, as the controls had the same results as the viral cultures.
He said that he finds it interesting, but still isn't sure.
I took a while to understand why that was not enough for him to look deeper, as he and Ryan from TLAV pretend to know terrain theory while spouting incorrect statements such as "terrain doesn't believe in bacteria" etc.... Obviously they have little knowledge of terrain stating things that terrain never said!
And then I realized it... They're fence sitters.
They're so lazy that they cannot choose what is most logical because the crowd still believes in germ theory.
Theyre too concerned about losing half their audience to actually have a truthful & meaningful discussion. And that's all I needed to know to realize I dont want to be part of that crew anymore and have since removed myself.
Follow the money! Both the drug cartels and the "help, save us from evil Chinese bioweapons" crowd make money from selling fear. That's where the biggest market is. Unfortunately, logic - even if it’s blindingly obvious - doesn't sell that well. We need to take a leaf from the much (unfairly) maligned Chinese and Russian playbook and be prepared to play the 'long game'.
Great work as always, Mike. I like what Christine Massey says. We need to ask the "yes-virus" people, "upon what science do you depend, to support your claims"?
The way Derrick conducts himself when challenged speaks for itself - particularly in this article by Proton Magic, and particularly in his responses to Proton, ET, and myself. He tends to resort to calling us "dumb fucks" over and over and over (mind you, none of us crossed the line with him once, and we didn't resort to childish name-calling).
I dont think Derrick is genuine, whatsoever. And this is coming from someone who used to be a fan of and respect his work. I've been observing his behavior the last few years when challenged by others (most extreme is his response to Allison McDowell, who pushes his buttons occasionally - and I dont necessarily agree with everything she says either.... )
I find it quite amusing that someone who preaches about "Exit and Build", yet is running for Mayor, can't handle a little pushback... hes gonna do just fine running for political office 🙄 the irony of that statement is absurd, and I made a point to bring that up in my replies to the post below. ("Exit the system", while also engaging in it DIRECTLY and running for political office lol). Apparently that triggered him further, which wasn't even my intent. But my god that dude has a short fuse and an obvious anger management problem.
No evidence for transmissible disease as it never happened in experiments, thus viruses have never been proven to not exist by definition (or, so what would you still like to call a virus?), might be a better way to start the 'no virus' discussion with people who have a hard time to imagine viruses do not exist.
.
The believe viruses exist is a real virus, so viruses do not exist physically, as they are a mental construct (a real idea) would be correct.
.
Here is a list of experiments which failed to prove contagion or transmissible disease exists:
Seems that Derrick often pivots to insults to avoid backing up his "not essential" claims. And he seems terribly confused. Asking for an answer is not equivalent to believing that you deserve "privileges"!
If I heard a politician say that, or heard them dismissing an entire movement of people - with admittedly valid concerns - as "rabid", I'd conclude they were either crooked or nuts. And claiming that it's not essential to learn what does and doesn't make us ill, and that safe quackcines are an impossibility... that's just bizarre.
Thanks Christine! I thought his argument that I was showcasing entitlement by asking for an answer was rather hilarious, especially coming from a person who interviews others regularly. According to Alec, the entitlement card appears to be a favorite of Derrick to get out of answering others.
Derrick's views are definitely at odds with each other, which is probably why it seems logical to him that two competing and polar opposite theories in germ and terrain can work together. He says that we have valid questions, and yet he attacks us as rabid and a psy-op. That is why I wanted to help enlighten him about our position, but he was less than interested. Hopefully, Derrick will live up to his investigative journalist title and start researching the topic himself before asking others about their opinions on it, but I'm not holding my breath. If he doesn't, perhaps he shouldn't speak on it at all. That would be far better than his misrepresentation of our position and his psy-op insinuations.
Investments. These people are ideologically invested in the virology narrative, they have believed it all their lives, doggedly cling to it. They are emotionally invested, fearing that any admission of being fundamentally wrong about it would undermine their legitimacy among their followers, given how often and repeatedly they have spewed this narrative to their fans. And more than a few of them are themselves financially invested in this narrative, offering "alternative treatments" to "viruses," or their sponsors/funders are. That's the hidden agenda.
Well said Jeffrey! I have a feeling that the political aspirations and motivations are also a factor in not touching the "virus" topic. They can't alienate their potential voters. 😉
Oh yeah, Bobby Jr. "We got a presidency to win." And the people he's fronting for have a Blockchain digital slavery they wish to herd us into under the guise of "take back your freedom." I need to get that Bobby Jr article written.
I would definitely love to read it when you do. 😁
I would love to get some feedback from you to my finished (or at least edited :-)) draft once i get it.
Agreed. They're a completely fake 'truth' movement or opposition to the Rockefeller medical establishment. When you reduce their position to the fundamentals, all they're asking for is for the establishment to say it made 'mistakes' and promise to do 'better' next round of medical tyranny, and they'd celebrate that they'd 'won' the battle and all is good. It's literally a sick joke to anyone who's paying attention, and is serving to keep a lot of people who know something's wrong but don't understand what in the grip of the massive Rockefeller fraud of germ theory and virus theory.
The germ theory team keeps playing whack a mole in the courts while the truth that the emperor has no clothes brings down the whole house of cards. Then knowing the Rockefeller medicine lie helps everyone wonder what else they’ve been lied to about bringing down the criminal activities of the psychopaths trying to gain control. The big myth needs big exposure. Perhaps they are not up to the task.
I agree 110% Ali. There is no benefit in not exposing the lie, especially here and now at this moment in time. If ever there was a clear signal that people are in need of learning the truth, the last 3 years are it.
So Derrick sees belief in politics as not-solution-focused... yet chose to run for Mayor of Houston anyways. Interesting. And according to Derrick, pumping people up without any solutions "feels" solution-focused. I think I'm noticing a pattern with Derrick, pivoting to "feelings" when he has nothing logical to say.
I think you are spot on there Christine. I'm all for a good speaker, but "pumping people up," as Del does, is not a solution. Giving people valuable information dispelling a centuries old fraud, as Alec did, most definitely is solution focused. I'm not sure how Derrick can not see how ridiculous his position is.
There are a lot of people in the so-called "truth" and "freedom" movement who are quite clearly perpetuating fear-porn to get clicks or sell products and that doesn't sit well with me. They use the same tactics that those they oppose do, with this "holier than thou" ego. I used to be in the community with Derrick, TLAV, and Whitney... but I started to see it for what it was and decided to abruptly remove myself from it because it didn't seem very productive - and some of Ryan's comments when myself and another guy were questioning him on germ theory also didn't sit well with me.... basically its too much and no one will believe it 🙄 what a ridiculous cop out.
And then I disengaged completely from that crowd. Calling themselves an investigative journalist, and espousing the importance of truth & freedom above all else, but making the types of comments they do about germ theory & virology is such a blatant contradiction. Especially when some of us were hand-feeding valuable resources to look into it themselves. I typically try to include a "short version" and long-version because I know peoples time & attention-span varies. Ive lost respect for those folks and the way myself and others have been treated, when we engaged in a respectful manner, has earned them a spot on my shit-list. I have no desire to have them on "our side" anymore honestly. Their clicks and their ego are more important than honesty & integrity.
Exactly!
That was EXACTLY the point I tried to make in Proton Magic's post, but then I got called a "fucking idiot" and "dumb fuck" multiple times by Derrick for pointing out what I thought was quite obvious hypocrisy 😂
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/isolated-terrain/comment/17244201
I remember!
Yes, lets leave the foundation of this house of cards intact! Lets give the Pharmaceutical mafia a continuing reason to exist. Let's equip future generations with unending fear of The Germ. There's a solution worth fighting for! /s
Not quite logical, is it? 😉
I've read everything I can and - although I still have some questions - my conclusion is that at the very least, virology is a complete and utter mess. Yet, I empathise with Broze in this conversation more than you.
Are you curious why, how you are alienating people who agree with you or might agree with you somewhat? This is a war with multiple fronts, a complex one, that will take place over a period of time, with many battles along the way. Your approach is rather like if you work for a company and the majority shareholder CEO has placed his son who is not competent in a key position. Everyone agrees - so does this mean the only solution is to walk into his office the next morning and demand his son be fired? Is this not just the correct course of action but obviously, without any disussion required, the correct course of action? Is anyone who has another approach a shill, living a lie etc? Of course not. Reasonable people can decide to keep plugging away at illuminating various issues and hope eventually the CEO will see this for himself.
You however don't see it like this - anything other than pounding on the CEO's desk telling him his son should be fired is not good enough. Maybe that's the correct course, maybe it's not - but your blind spot is that you think it is just obviously the correct course of action. I - and Broze and many others - don't agree.
I'm not quite certain how you view me as demanding. I'm not asking Derrick to do anything other than to present our position accurately, especially as Derrick says that he will continue to ask others about it. I also fail to see how the "no virus" topic should not be included in the discussion in regard to bringing about solutions to the problems we face. Obviously, Derrick must see some benefit to asking about it, otherwise he would ignore the topic entirely and stop addressing it. As Derrick is an investigative journalist who wants to continue discussing the topic, it is his duty to present our position as accurately as possible without painting it as a "rabid angry crowd" that is a possible CIA psyop. If you want to view that as demanding, so be it. I see it as fair and objective reporting that journalists are supposed to uphold.
Yes the discussion "framework" has to be clear and kept so - in any important exchanges otherwise NOTHING will be achieved by either party. What has been lost here in the above exchanges...is not all parties are coming to the table with this same honorable intention to play/be fair - in a shared desire for better future outcomes. We see this self-sabotage happen too much...usually one party brings "baggage" the other's didn't. Then the "baggage" becomes the discussion focus and pulls all opportunity for growth in knowledge - away !
Hats off to you Mike and Alec for going the extra mile/s to bring it back to the table every time, each time.
Thank you Koppykat! 🙂
I don't see that as a good analogy at all. Who's the CEO whose desk the "no virus" team is pounding on? It's more like we're trying to get out the word to the workers, customers, shareholders and the public at large that the product this company is supposedly selling doesn't actually exist. The invisible clothing on the emperor (or in this case, the invisible pathogens making people sick) are not just invisible, there's really and truly nothing there.
Yes, there are definitely people who agree that viruses are a cover story, who also express the opinion that health freedom advocates who don't agree are therefore "controlled opposition" or "pharma shills" or other unsavory types. That stance has never been promoted by anyone who's seen as a leader in this "no virus" camp, and in fact it has been cautioned against many times by those leaders.
I think my analogy was clear enough, I also wrote the point in plain clear analogy-free English - yet you both misinterpreted it. It's nothing to do with you being "demanding" and doesn't require there be a CEO's desk to bang on etc. So I think you both have a blind spot that prevents you seeing what I wrote, and no amount of words or explanation will help.
If multiple people didn't understand your analogy, perhaps it wasn't a very good one. It would be nice if you could clarify what you meant if you feel that we misunderstood you.
I used to subscribe to Derrick Broze's Telegram channel, and a few months ago he brought up something about "the virus" and I replied with a very mild disagreement and summary of why I do not believe that viruses exist. Several other people responded in support of what I wrote. Derrick argued, bringing up the "terrain and germ theory can both be true" notion, which I countered, and after a brief exchange he closed off the topic by saying that this discussion wasn't relevant to his page (even though he brought it up in the first place). He has done some great work, but his attitude seems to easily devolve to "I'm taking my ball and going home" when he feels like he is losing the game.
Hi Betsy, what you wrote here really sums up perfectly how I felt after my interaction with Derrick:
"his attitude seems to easily devolve to "I'm taking my ball and going home" when he feels like he is losing the game."
It is unfortunate when people, who could easily reach a larger audience with the truth about the fraud of germ theory/virology, are unwilling to invest the time to understand the position in order to do it justice when speaking about it. Instead, Broze (and Kennedy Jr./Bigtree, amongst others) are dismissing our position and, in Broze's case, badmouthing us while bringing the topic up. He could do so much good if he actually researched the topic and understood our position.
Over the years, I've had a few interactions with people who suffer from what I now understand to be Cluster B personality disorders - especially narcissists. What you have described fits with what I've noticed seems to be their characteristic behaviour:
When losing an argument, they either
1) change the subject, or
2) play the man, rather than the ball (which they then take and go home).
"...He could do so much good if he actually researched the topic and understood our position."
Perhaps you are giving Mr. Broze the benefit of the doubt, but reading his interaction here and with Proton, it seems he is well aware of the gist of the no-virus argument. But is instead going out of his way to dismiss/ridicule it. Which isn't very sincere approach to "researching/understanding" no virus position.
He frequently diverts to "pissed off teenager" when anyone challenges him - ive seen it consistently, over and over again. Its sad and kind of pathetic to watch (especially from someone who is running for political office.... big yikes!!!)
People like Broze and Bigtree are "career politicians" and warrior opportunists, not sincere researchers or teachers that have the slightest handle on solving this huge germ theory hoax mess that has allowed tyrants to completely derail human freedom and autonomy, not to mention common sense and awareness of reality. The reality is that you and you alone make yourself sick via your own voluntary lifestyle; primarily your diet in this modern century. Anyone who actually changes (not token alters) their diet over time (the only real experiment towards actual health, which is the elimination of all symptoms of dis-ease) can put the germ theory to rest once and for all. The trouble is that hardly anyone does this- instead they choose to pander to their social audiences hoping to increase their "sales value" for all kinds of products or services that support survival amidst the chaos. But there would be no chaos once everyone had a working understanding of what the germ theory of "infectious disease and contagion" and disease really was, and how simple it is to squash it. Of course, then all the Brozes and Bigtrees would be out of a job. Those who ACTUALLY educate the public, like Mike Stone and a tiny handful or others do not consider this their job. We all consider it our duty to humanity, money or no money, fame or no fame, notoriety or no notoriety.
Great article by Mike Stone. I think it's interesting that Del Bigtree who came out of the Dr Phil show may be a 'career politician' and is also from an 'entertainment' background. Apparently Norma Bigtree is Bigtree's mother and his last name is actually "Groverland." There is very little background on him otherwise that I can find. So is his role to entertain people and is this why Broze gets excited at the prospect of a "crowd pumper upper?" Entertainment?
"Norma Bigtree Groverland, Music Director and Minister Emeritus at Unity of Boulder, was born the middle child of three daughters to a Mohawk Native American Father and a Russian Immigrant Mother. Norman Bigtree was her father’s name and she was named after him (he had given up on having a boy, so she was named “Norma” Bigtree). She and her sisters became quite famous in the East as a singing, dancing trio called the “Bigtree Sisters.” Norma performed with her sisters all over New York State from the age of 4 until she went to New York City after attending two years at Syracuse University’s School of Music. She performed with Barry Manilow, Bernadtte Peters, etc, when she met Jack Groverland. Upon meeting him, they both embarked on a spiritual quest together, that has been the most rewarding life one could ever imagine."
https://unityofboulder.com/people/norma-groverland-2/
well said, thankyou
Mike you are in the top ten of medical freedom fighters including Rappoport, Massey, Dr. Bailey and Celia Farber. In the unlikely event the tyrants were ever put on trial, you should be the number one witness against them in terms of scientific knowledge.
What is so difficult pushing back against germ theory is that the average person is content in accepting simplistic solutions to explain the cause of illness. The medical cartel has always known this.
To my mind the mainstream narrative has not only been about proffering simplistic explanations but outright laziness in thinking things through. They are lazy people who see themselves as saints!
A man takes the virus as his bride. Watch Turfseer’s music video ONE TRICK PONY. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/one-trick-pony
BONUS: Free PDF Download. BEST OF SUBSTACK VOLUME 1. Gems culled from Best Substacks with links to the full article. https://turfseer.substack.com/p/best-of-substack-volume-1
Thank you Turfseer! I would gladly testify against the mosters pushing this fraudulent lie onto the masses.
What do the Chinese say? Did they really allow the Americans and their spies create a very dangerous viral pathogen in their territory? Are the Chinese that dumb and weak?
The Americans know the Chinese will never tell the truth about bioweapons research, which is why the virus is a cover story to never speak about what they really do, which has to do with poisons and antidotes.
They can’t bring the criminals to Justice with the gain of fiction story as there is no evidence. As you say Chinese will never allow inspection of their labs and everything done in our labs is “top security” as well. Very convenient cover story.
I personally take the view that "gain of function" represents an actual attempt to weaponise otherwise harmless, benign and naturally occurring nanoscale particles the scientists have misidentified as "virus" for the last 100 years. I believe they were unsuccessful:
"J.J. Couey's contributions to the debate also included discussing the role of Peter Daszak, Ralph Baric et al.’s gain-of-function research. What Couey suggests Daszak et al. were modifying was the inherent inert harmlessness of the nanoscale particles generated by Enders relieable and repeatable ‘viral’ propagation technique. Couey suggests that weaponised ‘gain-of-function’ of these otherwise harmless nanoscale particles represents intercellular communications noise, scrambling if you will, by bombarding the human body with meaningless RNA or DNA code (in the mRNA- and DNA-based COVID-19 vaccines particularly). This results in intercellular communications chaos within the human body, the consequences of which I think are ably demonstrated by the horrendous mRNA- and DNA-based COVID-19 vaccine harms across the globe. The psychopaths responsible for this mandated vaccination campaign and its accompanying corollary of propaganda and gaslighting have attempted to use gain-of-function research to turn these harmless nanoparticles into a biological weapon that interferes with the body’s own mysterious, internal RNA- and DNA-based communications mechanisms. I am not as confident as J.J. Couey that they have been successful. [29]"
Footnote 29: Couey repeatedly mentions the ‘release’ of ‘DNA viral clones,’ which PCR tests were able to pick up and thus ‘detect’ COVID-19 illness. I disagree with Couey’s assertion of DNA clones being released as bioweapons because these must be isolated, purified, biochemically characterised and genetically sequenced from a human sample prior to performing propagation just the same as any other ‘virus’. This, of course, has never been done: Val Turner’s objection at the beginning of this article still applies to Couey’s claims of ‘released’ DNA viral clones, too.
https://fullbroadside.substack.com/p/virologys-fatal-flaw
"weaponize" could be as simple as adding some poison ivy nectar or any other toxic substance to the nanoparticle mixture.
I could take a glass of water and "weaponize" it by adding a few drops of arsenic to it. A sexual deviant could "weaponize" a drink at a bar by adding Rohypnol to the drink. No virus needed. Virus synonym actually means poison.
My point is the gain of function narrative is blown out of proportion (for fear-inducing purposes).
I heard Del Bigtree's speech at VaxCon 23 back in April. He and at least one other highlighted speaker at that conference dismissed the "no virus" idea as absurd/ unimportant/ wrong (I really don't want to put words in their mouths; at the very least they expressed a negative view of it.) On the other hand, he and several of the other speakers went into great detail about how the respected scientific journals are often just plain wrong, and particularly how they have been wrong on top of wrong about various aspects of "covid." They had numerous slides showing screen shots from those journals, in order to show how they were contradictory and just wrong.
I was struck by the huge disconnect: they distrust, and are telling their followers to distrust those journals, when it comes to what they have to say about covid illness, its seriousness and "spread"; about the "safety and efficacy" of the shots, even about the basic value of vaccines in general (I think it was Pierre Kory who implied that). Yet, they accept at face value, without analyzing the articles or the studies that the articles report on, the ones titled "Isolation of SARS-CoV-2 ...."
They seem to be comfortable critiquing the articles that are based on statistics, but not the ones claiming to be based on science. It's really disappointing and unfortunate.
Yes Rose, it is a very odd disconnect. They seem to actively avoid critiquing the papers claiming the existence and pathogenicity of microbes, and yet on the other hand, they will attempt to tear apart any vaccine study showing safety and efficacy. If the focused on the core issue, i.e. the lack of scientific evidence proving germ theory, they wouldn't even need to touch on vaccines. The whole concept goes down with germ theory.
I had an exchange with Broze and I pointed him to the Lanka control experiment.
That's the experiment that scientifically confirmed it for me, as the controls had the same results as the viral cultures.
He said that he finds it interesting, but still isn't sure.
I took a while to understand why that was not enough for him to look deeper, as he and Ryan from TLAV pretend to know terrain theory while spouting incorrect statements such as "terrain doesn't believe in bacteria" etc.... Obviously they have little knowledge of terrain stating things that terrain never said!
And then I realized it... They're fence sitters.
They're so lazy that they cannot choose what is most logical because the crowd still believes in germ theory.
They suffer what is explained here: https://www.simplypsychology.org/kuhn-paradigm.html
Theyre too concerned about losing half their audience to actually have a truthful & meaningful discussion. And that's all I needed to know to realize I dont want to be part of that crew anymore and have since removed myself.
Follow the money! Both the drug cartels and the "help, save us from evil Chinese bioweapons" crowd make money from selling fear. That's where the biggest market is. Unfortunately, logic - even if it’s blindingly obvious - doesn't sell that well. We need to take a leaf from the much (unfairly) maligned Chinese and Russian playbook and be prepared to play the 'long game'.
Great work as always, Mike. I like what Christine Massey says. We need to ask the "yes-virus" people, "upon what science do you depend, to support your claims"?
Thanks John! I absolutely agree. This question must be asked. I would love it if Derrick would pose this question to them.
The way Derrick conducts himself when challenged speaks for itself - particularly in this article by Proton Magic, and particularly in his responses to Proton, ET, and myself. He tends to resort to calling us "dumb fucks" over and over and over (mind you, none of us crossed the line with him once, and we didn't resort to childish name-calling).
I dont think Derrick is genuine, whatsoever. And this is coming from someone who used to be a fan of and respect his work. I've been observing his behavior the last few years when challenged by others (most extreme is his response to Allison McDowell, who pushes his buttons occasionally - and I dont necessarily agree with everything she says either.... )
I find it quite amusing that someone who preaches about "Exit and Build", yet is running for Mayor, can't handle a little pushback... hes gonna do just fine running for political office 🙄 the irony of that statement is absurd, and I made a point to bring that up in my replies to the post below. ("Exit the system", while also engaging in it DIRECTLY and running for political office lol). Apparently that triggered him further, which wasn't even my intent. But my god that dude has a short fuse and an obvious anger management problem.
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/isolated-terrain/comments#comment-17286283
No evidence for transmissible disease as it never happened in experiments, thus viruses have never been proven to not exist by definition (or, so what would you still like to call a virus?), might be a better way to start the 'no virus' discussion with people who have a hard time to imagine viruses do not exist.
.
The believe viruses exist is a real virus, so viruses do not exist physically, as they are a mental construct (a real idea) would be correct.
.
Here is a list of experiments which failed to prove contagion or transmissible disease exists:
https://dpl003.substack.com/p/virology-the-damning-evidence
Another great article, Mike, as always!
Seems that Derrick often pivots to insults to avoid backing up his "not essential" claims. And he seems terribly confused. Asking for an answer is not equivalent to believing that you deserve "privileges"!
If I heard a politician say that, or heard them dismissing an entire movement of people - with admittedly valid concerns - as "rabid", I'd conclude they were either crooked or nuts. And claiming that it's not essential to learn what does and doesn't make us ill, and that safe quackcines are an impossibility... that's just bizarre.
Thanks Christine! I thought his argument that I was showcasing entitlement by asking for an answer was rather hilarious, especially coming from a person who interviews others regularly. According to Alec, the entitlement card appears to be a favorite of Derrick to get out of answering others.
Derrick's views are definitely at odds with each other, which is probably why it seems logical to him that two competing and polar opposite theories in germ and terrain can work together. He says that we have valid questions, and yet he attacks us as rabid and a psy-op. That is why I wanted to help enlighten him about our position, but he was less than interested. Hopefully, Derrick will live up to his investigative journalist title and start researching the topic himself before asking others about their opinions on it, but I'm not holding my breath. If he doesn't, perhaps he shouldn't speak on it at all. That would be far better than his misrepresentation of our position and his psy-op insinuations.
Bingo!! xoxoxo
Well written Mike and in case you weren't aware, I have covered some of the misconceptions that Derrick Broze et al got at the moment in this article.
My attempt to address some misconceptions
https://johnblaid.substack.com/p/my-attempt-to-address-some-misconceptions
Awesome! Thanks for sharing John! I will add that to the Recommended Reading section. 🙂