Current microbiology/virology thinks it understands viruses and has it all stitched up and tries to bamboozle everyone with alleged viral genome sequence myths but it is hardly scratching the surface. It is sadly in ERROR for thinking that a bit of physical RNA or DNA + protein coat IS a particular human pathogenic virus (dead or alive!).

If that is true then H1N1 (for example) really can fly – that's why its been called the 'flying pig virus'! Swine flu followed Bird flu – perhaps we shall soon be presented with the specific genome sequences of the virulent strains of Laughing Jackass flu or Teddy Bear flu next – all it takes is a bit of imagination on the part of the scientist and bits of cellular debris to play around with!

If what I am saying is merely a load of rubbish, then I am still waiting for someone – anyone to prove my arguments are wrong after reading ALL of my blog on this website to date.

Best to Teeny for supplying the learned Professor's quote.

For example, before we can predicate an alleged 'virus' with the attributes of life or death it must first of all have to be proven to exist scientifically. To date this has not been done by any person worthy of being called a scientist. For all the talk and pontification regarding this matter nobody has had the bottle to come clean and admit that there is no conclusive scientific proof or concrete scientific evidence at hand that can substantiate the claim that any of the ALLEGED human pathogenic viruses exist. If this statement is untrue then the easiest way to refute it would be to supply the evidence to the contrary.

If nobody can provide such evidence then the question as to whetherany of the alleged pathogenic viruses are alive or dead is redundant and the focus remains on the study of a false problem, namely, the bits of nuclear material that are packaged and known to be ejected from dieased and damaged cells as a RESULT of a disease process that is caused by many different factors other than the alleged nuclear particles that scientists refer to as pathogenic viruses.

C)??????????????????????????????????????????????//

Here, I am referring to the alleged human disease causing viruses. To date I have been unable to find any hard scientific evidence that these pathogenic viruses actually exist in isolation in the natural physical material world.

If viruses in general [assuming they do exist] are BOTH dead AND alive which you appaer to be implying then their general form of existence is a CONTRADICTORY one. If that is the case then how are they able to function effectively as viruses at all whether inside or outside a cell??? Do you see the problem here?

Regards, Tony

Since it is now fairly easy to create certain viruses from scratch, as done by Eckard Wimmer of Stony Brook University, I think it's not really life that's being created, but rather at best “re-created” from known information. This life can be “molded” within certain parameters to be put to good use, for instance in the making of new vaccines, as the groups around Eckard Wimmer and Steffen Mueller subsequently showed (some explanation found here: http://ms.cc.sunysb.edu/~smueller/index.html )

The closest thing to creating some type of new life form is the group around Craig Venter. They use a completely synthetic bacterial genome, and try to transplant it into an empty bacterium, which had its genome completely taken out. However, as I said this process depends on an empty surrogate bacterium, which contains all the “stuff of life” in form of thousands of different proteins, EXCEPT the information (i.e genome) to replicate itself. So, even if they succeed in doing that, it's a new life form, since after “booting” it from the synthetic genome, it will assume the propertied encoded by the new genome.

To date NOBODY has ever provided any concrete scientific evidence that conclusively proves that the alleged human disease causing viruses exist let alone EVOLVE a la Darwinian style. So I would not get too excited about this report on prion research that claims to have a 'scientific' basis.

If you can provide any proof concerning the isolation and existence of human pathogenic viruses Dr Stefan Lanka (virologist and molecular biologist) would be more than pleased to examine it and you can claim his 10,000 euros reward if it conforms to the rigorous scientific criteria for virus isolation etc. Also bear in mind that nobody in the materialistic microbiology fraternity has ever claimed to have observed a live pathogenic virus as far as I am aware . Royal Raymond Rife may well have been the only exception but his work is largely ignored today.

Best wishes

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-12/…
Public release date: 31-Dec-2009
Contact: Keith McKeown
Scripps Research Institute
Scripps Florida scientists show 'lifeless' prions capable of evolutionary change and adaptation

I really can't believe that rational human beings can be taken in by it. There is no conclusive proof whatsoever that viruses 'pathogenic' or otherwise have ever evolved as 'artifacts' or anything else, or that viruses CAUSE harm or disease in a living host despite what the textbook propaganda says.

Do not forget that viruses are merely assigned certain functions in and by microbiology, it does not follow that they DO actually perform those functions or that they are constrained to perform them in the modalities alleged independently of the particular discourse in which they are specified e.g. in the 'real world' conceived as existing independently of discourse. Hope you understand my the meaning of my argument since it raises ontological and epistemological questions concerning the existence and knowledge of viruses that I can't go into here.

Viruses are therefore not living, being unable to do anything without access to their specific host's living cellular machinary, and only becoming active as a component of the host cell.

They should be seen as an evolved 'artifact' of living cells that have, unfortunately, the ability to cause harm.

There is no proof that viruses reproduce their own genetic material that would be another miracle for a bunch of dead chemicals – it is only made to APPEAR that way. If that were really possible then they would be capable of ACTING in some way and yes they could 'utilize' mechanisms within other cells.

The way in which viruses are conceived at the moment in microbiology is problematic – they cannot 'utilize' the cellular systems to reproduce despite all arguments to the contrary – that's just a myth. In fact they cannot 'utilize' anything – they are dead in the water so to speak , even if we give them a postulated existence.

You are correct in what you say in your last sentence, but to go down that road would imply that really there is no dead matter whether it is inorganic or organic and that everything is really alive at least to a limited degree and in various forms. Since current microbiology is still bogged down in its quagmire of mechanistic and materialistic way of thinking such a notion would be regarded as heretical.

Best wishes for Christmas & the New Year

Human pathogenic viruses despite all arguments to the contrary have never been effectively isolated, photographed and biochemically characterized to date.

Where is the conclusive proof that such viruses really exist? I have seen none and can't find any, and NOBODY has come forth with any because there is none. Please prove me WRONG and show me the proof – no indirect methods will do – no secondary references – no textbook references of computer enhanced models – no 'virus-like particles' – only the original primary sources, with the names of the scientists who carried out the work and readable copies concerning the methodology and techniques as to how they did it.

Think about that sort of whitewash you are being led to believe because that's all it is, an unproven, unfounded belief. It is certainly not what I understand as being 'scientific' in any way shape or form.

When we are dead I bet you cannot specify the physical environmental conditions necessary to activate us all again, unless of course you have an unconditional belief in the potential of fictitious zombies – the so-called 'living dead'