84 Comments

This is just ridiculous and is the product of a total misunderstanding of metagenomics, etiology, and the admission by 209 governments and institutions that they have no sample of a Scov-2 virus particle taken from a human host. The bottom line is that the PCR used for Scov-2 is primed with in silico and not real primers. PCR is a simple matching principle; it cannot find what it does not have — and the one thing that it does not have is any genetic code that has ever been shown to match a virus or cause disease.

Additionally, many, many other people besides Drs. Cowan and Kaufman have done independent research (meaning doctoral level) on this issue, and they include Drs. Sam and Mark Bailey (who have ferreted out the history of viruses back to the first hour), Dr. Kevin Corbett, filmmaker Michael Wallach, and two stars of independent journalism, Christine Massey and Mike Stone.

As early as 2006 and even before, the PCR was known to produce 100% false positives resulting in three different non-existent "pandemics." The PCR cannot measure viral load, find virus or test for infection, and that is the ONLY proof that "there is a virus spreading." It was never about symptoms or the few people who may have had them; it's always been about the false "case count" manufactured by the PCR.

The problem is not about Kaufman or Cowan defending their allegedly terrible theory. It is about the lack of understanding of the whole problem of virology and its false conflation with metagenomics.

Please see:

https://planetwaves.fm/a-farewell-to-virology-by-dr-mark-bailey/

All of my reporting notes are here:

https://audio.pwfm.tech/documents/covid-chronology-5.1.3.pdf

Expand full comment

Well done Eric, i was just trying to think how to write a reply that wouldnt take me all night. You've save me the worry.

Expand full comment

I have way too much practice at this.

Expand full comment

Bradford-Hill criterion is not for showing that a thing (i.e. "SARS-COV-2" particle) exists. You have to already know that a potential cause exists and be able to measure/detect it in order to apply Bradford-Hill. Alleged "viruses" like "SARS-COV-2" on the other hand have never even been shown to exist, let alone cause anything. "It" hasn't been sequenced. Virologists simply ASSEMBLE meaningless, fraudulent, strictly in silico sequences on computers, from zillions of smaller sequences of unknown provenance, and label them "genomes". You've been duped if you're buying into Hammond's nonsense. Read the Methods sections of the papers for yourself.

Expand full comment

And no one is required to answer any of your questions in order to refute the virus hypothesis. The onus is on those who make the claim that something exists to prove it. Nevertheless, if you had studied the work of the great men you mentioned above you would not be nearly so confused.

Expand full comment

My God you're confused. "The theory advanced by Dr. Cowan and Dr. Kaufman that viruses don’t exist..." We don't have a theory, we are refuting a hypothesis that has never even been tested with valid controlled experiments. Virologists don't even get to the stage of finding and purifying an alleged virus from the bodily fluid/tissue of an alleged "host" to use as an independent variable in any controlled experiment (JLW: try telling me again that I don't understand what an independent variable is? lol).

Freedom of Information Responses reveal that health/science institutions around the world (211 and counting!) have no record of SARS-COV-2 (the alleged convid virus) isolation/purification, anywhere, ever:

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/

FOIs reveal that health/science institutions have no record of any “virus” having been found in a host and isolated/purified. Because virology isn’t a science:

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-have-no-record-of-any-virus-having-been-isolated-purified-virology-isnt-a-science/

Do virologists perform valid control experiments? Is virology a science?

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/do-virologists-perform-valid-control-experiments-is-virology-a-science/

Expand full comment

Yeah. That sentence alone, the moment I read it, immediately sounded wrong.

It was putting the cart before the horse.

Cowan, Kaufman et al ARE NOT ADVANCING ANY THEORY. Rather, they are pointing out the holes in an existing theory/model.

Expand full comment

My God you're confused. "The theory advanced by Dr. Cowan and Dr. Kaufman that viruses don’t exist..." We don't have a theory, we are refuting a hypothesis that has never even been tested with valid controlled experiments. Virologists don't even get to the stage of finding and purifying an alleged virus from the bodily fluid/tissue of an alleged "host" to use as an independent variable in any controlled experiment (JLW: try telling me again that I don't understand what an independent variable is? lol).

Freedom of Information Responses reveal that health/science institutions around the world (211 and counting!) have no record of SARS-COV-2 (the alleged convid virus) isolation/purification, anywhere, ever:

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-around-the-world-have-no-record-of-sars-cov-2-isolation-purification/

FOIs reveal that health/science institutions have no record of any “virus” having been found in a host and isolated/purified. Because virology isn’t a science:

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/fois-reveal-that-health-science-institutions-have-no-record-of-any-virus-having-been-isolated-purified-virology-isnt-a-science/

Do virologists perform valid control experiments? Is virology a science?

https://www.fluoridefreepeel.ca/do-virologists-perform-valid-control-experiments-is-virology-a-science/

Expand full comment

"If we maintain silence, I think the doubts about the no-virus hypothesis would naturally fall by the wayside."

Rather, we should point virus skeptics to a data source that provides compelling arguments against the no-virus hypothesis. Failure to engage is unethical as it is censorship by degree.

Expand full comment

No scientific data source exists in virology, that's the problem in a nutshell.

Expand full comment

Ok, that's crank talk.

Expand full comment

Cite one.

Expand full comment

1st study:

"SARS-CoV-2 viral RNA was prepared by extracting total RNA from Vero cells... infected with BetaCoV/Korea/KCDC03/2020 (Kim et al., 2020), ... cultured in DMEM (GIBCO) supplemented with 2% fetal bovine serum (GIBCO) and penicillin-streptomycin..."

So they used a soup of RNA extracted from a monkey/cow/bacterial/fungi soup that also contained a fake "SARS-COV-2 isolate" that is actually a monkey/cow/human/bacterial/fungi soup. So the provenance of the sequences alleged to be "viral" cannot be traced to any particular particle and there is no way that a resulting in silico "genome" can be scientifically said to represent any particular particle.

"cDNA from uninfected Vero cells (Uninf) were used as negative controls" - they did not perform their "sequencing" steps on a control where everything was the same minus the alleged virus, or even using all the same materials except with a clinical sample from a healthy patient or someone with another health issue. So no valid controls.

2nd paper you cited is a review, not a study: "Here we provide a short background on coronaviruses, and describe in more detail the novel SARS-CoV-2 and attempts to identify effective therapies against COVID-19."

The word "control" appears twice:

"When lopinavir/ritonavir was tested in a rigorous randomized, controlled, open-label trial...."

"Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention"

LOL.

3rd article: another review! "The biological and clinical significance of emerging SARS-CoV-2 variants"

4th article: another review! "Mechanisms of SARS-CoV-2 entry into cells"

5th article:

"Structural basis of receptor recognition by SARS-CoV-2... Here we determined the crystal structure of the receptor-binding domain (RBD) of the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 (engineered to facilitate crystallization) in complex with ACE2...

SARS-CoV-2 spike ... SARS-CoV spike... RaTG13 spike...and ACE2 were all synthesized... SARS-CoV-2, SARS-CoV, chimeric RBDs [receptor-binding domains] were subcloned into pFastBac vector... All of the proteins were prepared from Sf9 insect cells ..."

These guys aren't even dealing with a real-life particle found in any alleged "host", let alone sequencing and characterizing it and showing that it's a replication competent intracellular obligate parasite that spreads disease from host to host via natural modes of exposure using valid controls.

Expand full comment

Dear Christine Massey (FOIs ???)

I think if you want logical people to debate and discuss with you, you have to agree to what common ground you do agree on, otherwise it will fail to convince both ways.

I will list a few ground truths and you let people know how far along you can comfortably follow and then explain why some of the common knowledge is false and others will try and clear up the specific gaps in your knowledge. I believe this theory only exists when false equivalence is used to 'prove' a negative and the "no-virus" theory is equally valid with the "virus" theory to explain the real world until one or the other side comes up with repeatable tests for the various hypothesis.

This list is in roughly the order I think the body of knowledge is structured. Simply explain why any of the points are UNSOUND and provide documentation of a testable proof.

It was getting so long that I moved it to my stack so it is easier to refer to, sorry, you can ignore the challenge or click to my post and comment there if you want to discuss.

https://cholecalciferol.substack.com/p/virology-says

Expand full comment

You are an unethical logician.

Using rhetorical devices like "fake" exposes your duplicity.

Expand full comment

I doubt it. Ha. you'd think the flat earthers would be gone by now but the beliefs of the group is growing. They even doubt man made satellites. The idea was at first to ignore them.

The problem is there is always an element of truth somewhere in their twisted logic. From that they extrapolate all kinds of lunny ideas. Then they find a group that's like minded, that's where the ideas spawn and become firmly entrenched.

Expand full comment

but why not let them debate it? there should be rigorous debate about this topic. I can see with all your questions: ...."if there is no virus?" .... that you are not fully understanding what they are arguing. It is very deep, admittedly. It deserves to be debated.

Expand full comment

I'm starting to understand that the new definition of misinformation is Truth. Thank you for this wonderful learning article. The links will keep me busy all day.

Expand full comment

If you watch how Christine Massey works, you see that she asks for science, which you will then provide, then replies with rhetoric that the science you provided is "fake", showing that she's unethical, which you ought then point out. Then Massey lies and says that you didn't provide any science.

Massey is a fraud who is out to extract fools from their $$$. It's worth engaging her to point this out. Perhaps her followers will see that she is unethical and come to their senses.

Expand full comment

I want to add the historical element to the pathogen theory. They say that when Columbus sailed the ocean blue in 1492 he brought sailors with mouths full of pathogens, and rotting teeth that had resulted from 700 years of fighting the Spanish re-conquista. They say that the sailors just breathing on the native population was enough to make them drop dead. Europe had gone through centuries of disease experience, centuries of the plague. The plague (the Black Death) that decimated the population of Europe in the 14th century (1350?) was carried by fleas on burrowing rodents when the trade routes moved north, away from the desert. Before the plague arrived, Europeans lived in profoundly unsanitary conditions with sewer running in the streets, rats everywhere, and no clean water, but the people adapted to it apparently because there was a population boom. The plague hit city after city and killed in a matter of days with the victims developing black pustules in their lymph nodes. It wasn't just Europe. The slave armies of Cairo were almost completely wiped out in their barracks. Some places, though, were not hit and the living conditions were the same as places that were. If there was no pathogen, no plague, what killed all those people? If there is no pathogens then what does disease experience mean? The sailors had disease experience and were much less healthy than the natives who had perfect teeth, no rotting And yet the sailors didn't die and the healthy people did. Eliminate the simplest explanation and it is very confusing.

Expand full comment

Not sure, but I think bacteria & other larger pathogens have been identified, but viruses have not? I remember (in nursing school a million years ago) that one difference between bacteria & virus is that bacteria have cell walls & can therefore be treated with antibiotics. Fast forward to about 10 years ago when I took my middle school daughter to pediatrician with stiff neck, fever & headache. Dr. says she has viral meningitis. I say how do you know it’s not bacterial? “Because she’s sitting here talking to us”. No treatment - self resolving. So, the elusive virus / vaccine science seems a bit sketchy to me.

Expand full comment

Wasn't there someone on Twitter, offering large sums to whomever would present him with an isolate; but no one came forward? That must have been in 2020 or 2021. What is the current status of that challenge? I totally endorse the last 3 paras of the above article, yet I find it irritating if no isolate was actually presented to skeptics.

Expand full comment
Oct 16, 2022·edited Oct 16, 2022

Provide me with a single electron as an isolate to prove electrons exist.

Expand full comment

No, you muddled it up, they don't want just one, they want a whole bottle of electrons.

I must remember this as a counter, was trying to come up with something pithy in that vein earlier.

Expand full comment

In order to get the "live" attenuated virus particles that are used in some vaccines, they have to come from somewhere. They get them from allowing living cells to make more copies of them. So, they start with a little and end up with a lot of these electron microscope visible particles. Just saying. Some will say the visible particles are just cellular debris from preparing the stuff to look at it under the microscope. Others say they are distinct separate replicated particles. We'll never know for sure because we can't watch it happen.

Expand full comment

There is no reason on Earth why the alleged "virus" could not be obtained directly from the alleged "hosts" if it actually existed. Starving/poisoning monkey cells and declaring that a "virus" grew and is the cause of cytopathic effects, and calling that "virus isolation" is the height of pseudoscience. And they do not use purified particles in the fake vaccines; their "isolates" are monkey/cow/human/bacteria/fungi soups from their meaningless cell cultures.

Expand full comment

What if the FizerNazis come to your village, dose you with X-rays, poison you with warfarin, and with E. coli, mycoplasmas, and spirochetes - all harboring sequences for 'Ebola' - so as to create the false positive serology and PCR's for another fake 'Ebola' outbreak?

You gonna take Vit K and antibiotics or the I.V. Remdesivir kidney poison?

This vrilogy death cult stuff is all Lysenko pseudoscience. The psychopaths at the top of the food chain know about all kinds of 'Emerging Pathogens' trickery you never imagined. Open your mind.

Why do suppose they still rely on these bizarre tissue culture methods for the 'Isolation of Virus' fakery? To trick the stupid technicians.

Whatever they're playing around with in the lab all dressed-up in moon suits, they're not finding any 'novel viruses'.

Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. USA

Vol. 71, No. 2, pp. 464-468, February 1974

Interaction of Mycoplasmas with Cell Cultures, as Visualized by

Electron Microscopy

(scanning electron microscope/cell-surface replicas/autoradiography)

SUSAN BROWN, MARLYN TEPLITZ, AND JEAN-PAUL REVEL

Division of Biology, Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, Calif. 91109

Communicated by Jerome Vinograd, October 15, 1973

Vrilogy is a death cult. Beware! Individuals who question the dogma tend to die under mysterious circumstances.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

If you study electronic engineering first and then stumble onto Raymond Rife it is a bit disconcerting. After trying to figure out how he did it and then when you track down as far as is possible in the existing source material it turns out that there never were specific frequencies. I have a theory that almost no Rife fan will tolerate but believe to explain why he could cure some diseases.

With modern technology it is easy to replicate the way his apparatus was supposed to work but there is insufficient information on how to use it or how it effects anything.

His virus capable microscope is also a bit hard to swallow but who knows there are a few pictures of the apparatus that was complicated as was common of that era microscopes. So from what I understand he was a believer in viruses that he could observe with a light microscope. The first giant viruses visible with optical equipment were documented only in 1981 ten years after Rife dies.

Expand full comment
Comment removed
Expand full comment

I have not done very much research into Rife past what I needed to be reasonably certain of what was documented compared to what is now claimed.

I was under the impression that Rife claimed to have 'frequencies' for a lot of things and claimed to be able to see his 'frequencies' destroy/burst open viruses. I don't know if he made these claims but they are out there. The claim that he could observe live viruses seems unsupportable at this time with equipment available today. Optical microscopes today with UV and laser illumination and scanning confocal systems are pretty good but they rarely observe live viruses.

Thank you for assuming my sincerity, that is flattering and accurate.

There were a few times that I became interested in Rife resonators. Once in the early days of the internet, before the WWW when there were very few collections of information and only reports in some old books that a friend of mine had, he was a radionics fan and I had and still have misgivings about it for the simple reason that there is too much gadgetry included for a theory that does not need gadgetry. In a similar way the original Rife resonators were simple devices and should have been possible to duplicate and reproduce results (so far no reports have come to light in my experience). So I did some dinging but could not get enough information to proceed further.

Later I head of the SCIO (sic) systems (expensive shady franchise) that were diagnostic and I think could treat as well, also more elaborate radionics treatment machines were marketed. Some mention of Rife frequencies were suggested for radionic treatments. No firm data to lock onto so no progress.

Now more recently I was reading about Software Defined Radios /SDRs) due to my electronic engineering background and interest in the Amateur Radio (HAM) hobby they seemed to be a great tool for generating radio frequencies. I wondered if they could replicate the Rife resonator equipment with modern gear. More historical information was available including the fact that Rife generally used a globe/lamp with his emitting/transmitting electrodes to 'broadcast'/whatever the frequencies. His system used hetrodyning of two oscillators, a sine wave and a square-wave oscillator. There is NOTHING magical about the apparatus he was using by modern standards. In the day it would have been expensive re-purposed laboratory equipment but these days the same can be achieved with two SDR dongles, a RF mixer and a RF amplifier. Actually the results now could be almost perfect ly what Rife might have dreamed of or hoped to achieve. The problem arises when designing an experimental set-up to recreate his results for ANY pathogen. There is no way to know what the actual active frequency is. His protocol set a square-wave signal with attendant harmonics and hetrodyned (mixed) it with a sine-wave signal at some other frequency, then he would 'CHOOSE' one of the resulting harmonics and call that the active frequency without mentioning which one he chose (no way for him to know really) and with no accurate values for the starting frequencies either. Well all is not lost we could simply automate the process and try ALL COMBINATIONS and see if one of them had any effect on any pathogen and then compare the effect with many pathogens and see if certain frequency combinations had preferential effect on certain pathogens. Basically a really simple experiment to set up if you wanted to replicate. Find a lab prepared to supply bacteria and virus cultures and st up the few hundred EUROs of gear to generate pure frequencies or hetrodynes harmonic series. TEST BOTH and test for all combinations from the lowest to the highest that Rife could have used or reported in any notes.

Bacteria are the easiest to culture and there are labs that have cultured a new generation of bacteria I think it was every day for decades to observe mutations. Yeast is a no brainer, hobby wine and beer makers use it daily. Fungus needs very clean environments too but mushroom growers culture and hybridise these in basement labs with DIY lateral flow cabinets.

So my position is as follows:

Doctors could easily have wanted him out of the way

Lack of easy to do tests are missing

Claims to see viruses are not credible

Rife probably killed some pathogens with his machine

I believe the action was not due to the selection of frequency

The true nature of his tratment may threaten big pharma much more

Tell me why you think he was right rather than that he was persecuted because that only tells us he was a nuisance to the system. Butter me up and I will probably tell you how his machine worked but you will probably not believe me and will probably be disappointed

I can also find a YT video of someone having made use of SDRs to try and replicate the Rife machine but their explanation was most unconvincing, either they did not understand and hoped you would be lulled into a sense of believing their credentials or they had realised the failing of the setup and were simply bullshitting the audience, I was left convinced that they had not killed a single pathogen.

Expand full comment

Perhaps you should read Karen Kingston's substack for answers to the proposed questions. We have 5G and aerial spraying at play too. Important to consider environmental variables.

Expand full comment

the satellites are everywhere - and why is a presumption of one cause even meekly valid?

Expand full comment

How many people have been kicked off YouTube for conspiracy theories, not many.

Quite a number have been booted for promoting conspiracy facts though.

Use that as your guide because conspiracy theories work for the propaganda machine by dividing us and confusing the old grannies. Conspiracy facts by contrast cost billions of dollars if they become common knowledge.

Theories so far "no-virus", "flat earth", "chem trails", "5G", "UFOs"

Facts: "vaccine harm", "Ivermectin benefit", "HCQ benefit", "Vitamin-D3 benefit", "anti covid narrative"

Go read the rules for YouTube publishers.

Expand full comment

The "facts" don't actually have to be factual if they undermine $$$ for pharma. I am still skeptical about IVM, but HCQ looks like the evidence is overwhelming in its favor.

Vit. D supplementation will work for a lot, with calcifediol as a backup for those who have trouble converting D3 to calcifediol.

Expand full comment

Yes, the point is that if there was a real danger that the mythical chem-trails were to be exposed then they would censor them as well.

Not trying to play them down I left HCQ and Vitamin-D3 out because they create less controversy but both share the podium places with IVM and have the greatest number of studies relating to covid that are listed at C19EARLY * COM I have edited them into my list to give them equal prominence. From my SubStack name you can guess which one I favour as a boon for humanity that transcends the current virus.

I suggest the regular Vitamin-D3 with magnesium for supplementation for everyone everywhere (wholesale cost of Cholecalciferol is less than a dollar PER YEAR PER ADULT) and offering a cocktail of the vitamin and the two important metabolites together in a well reasoned ratio should be common practice for ANYONE who has symptoms of almost ANYTHING when they get to hospital. Almost no downsides and usually upsides. Affects many different diseases almost anything that it is studied with it shows an affect of some sort clear effects for over 90 conditions listed at the VitamiDwiki.

Expand full comment

"when they get to hospital"

my family's aim is to avoid the hospital, so we take elderberry concentrate if we get any ILI symptoms along with 50 mg zinc, 20 mcg calcifediol, and 1 gram vit. C.

Expand full comment

I have a two-week ban for saying the word "monkeypox."

Expand full comment

I'm not following the direction you're going in with your comments. YouTube is irrelevant to the conversation at hand. I'll state again as I have commented on this substack before. The more diligence you put into researching the "theory" of aerial spraying programs and 5G technology/infrastructure, the less of a theory it will become. It is only conjecture to those who don't do the work. Again, I'll end this debate with suggesting you spend some time on researching the topics in depth.

Expand full comment

I looked casually and it's a joke.

Expand full comment

I have looked at it and every single credible reference was speculative. Sure in theory it is possible but would you piss in your own well? Would it even work, we don't know but it serves the power to leave the speculation going because it makes the ignorant and credible get distracted from the real con. The vaccines were put in place to transfer wealth and power and as a happy bonus they also generate a lot of medicine customers.

I don't need to research chem-trails further to know they have no merit, I also don't have to research 5G to know it has no proof of any specific anything. Does it kill insects, maybe, need more data, does it kill birds, not near out tower, does it kill humans, obviously not fast enough unless you want to place the excess mortality at the doorstep of 5G sure make your case. Can it control people perhaps a few susceptible individuals may feel some dread when large electrical or electromagnetic fields are present, does it brainwash you, nope, TV does that.

For your own enjoyment find out how many people gave been booted from YT for promoting chem-trails or 5G. I don't know of any but perhaps there are hundreds.

Expand full comment

Do toxins become less deadly over time like covid variants have?

With respect to 5G, we have had covid where there is no 5G and we have had 5G where there is no covid. This is a black swan of a clinched lack of correlation.

Aerial spraying is merely an off-the-wall hypothesis.

Expand full comment

No hypothesis at all. Aerial spraying occurs globally and is very real and ongoing-under the guise of geoengineering efforts. Programs funded by Bill Gates on "blocking the sun". Military operations current and past. Operation sea spray for example. Chemicals, heavy metals, bacteria, pathogens, viruses, ai nanotechology, etc etc. Over 200 US patents, military whistleblowers...the list goes on....you need to research more diligently.

Expand full comment

So you have nothing. No links, no books, nothing. Just blowing bullshit.

Expand full comment

Sure, but I actually have little to no time during the work day to do your homework for you and I could care less how diligent and well informed you choose to be. I gave you one operation name. Look it up. I mentioned patents. Go on us patent website and type keywords in. Look up bill gates program. The internet is amazing. Use it purposely and you'll be enlightened on what you find.

Expand full comment

I drafted a patent for someone, never been used. Modern technology has made my idea irrelevant. Proves nothing about the subject matter.

That Bill Gates wants to test sun-blocking in Sweden is probably his way of mooning you people, he quite possibly has a special department that leaks details of these thought experiments to someone in a conspiracy group if people start to discuss vaccine harms in earnest.

Please consider the fact that you are being played because that is what I would do with a bunch of gullible people if I wanted to hide inconvenient theories.

Also please consider the "Pissing in your own well." defence, if there is something bad about chemtrails then why would these who could control them place them over their own heads. Utter crazy and that we should not expect from them.

Make like Winnie the Pooh, and "Think, think, think!"

Expand full comment

"She's" maybe a false flag op? Or just a useful idiot?

Expand full comment

Because she didn't do your homework for you, you're throwing a hissy fit? How do you know that she "has nothing"? You may have heard of the internet. Use it.

Expand full comment

Lol, go take your nap little one.

Expand full comment

> The theory advanced by Dr. Cowan and Dr. Kaufman that viruses don’t exist

"We actually are not presenting a theory. Because a theory would purport to explain natural phenomena. What we are doing is refuting a theory. We haven't made a claim as to the cause of the disease. But there has been a claim made that there is a virus called SARS-CoV-2... and that [this virus causes] a specific disease.

What we are doing is refuting the evidence put forth to satisfy that claim, because it is extremely faulty and perhaps even fraudulent at some level."

-- Dr Andrew Kaufman, Testimony before the German Corona Committee 4 Feb 2022

Expand full comment

Girl, one patent doesn't disprove the theory nor the reality. Nor does a 5 min search into Bill

gate's initiative. That's sheer ignorance and naivety. Geoenginnering is a big topic globally. Question what they are spraying then the impact of it. Please consider researching the subject in depth.

Expand full comment