I thought MidWestern Doctor's essay was reasonably presented, if long, but in general I don't care. It's extraneous to the philosophical, legal and moral crux of refusing induction into the Medical Mythology. The Greater Good rationale is a hammer cracking all nuts. Some people do believe, most have never heard of exosomes as cellular detritus and will only be bewildered. Maybe that's a strategy of befuddlement. https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/thoughts-on-the-existence-of-viruses/comment/7953070
I've commented several times on the length of his posts. Suggested he make it a Game of Thrones serial instead. To be honest I'm not sure it matters why people resist. If they know enough to NO!, that's good enough.
I agree. Always have. Just not sure why we can't have the debate about it or why it causes so much conflict. I mean I got to Terrain via retroviruses, the "Spanish Flu", Stefan Lanka, old and new books on the subject, and likely a bit of a lifelong opposition to 'modern medicine'. But anyone asking the same questions in the last 6 months will just end up attracting abuse.
If viruses were ever proven to not be real and/or pathogenic and contagious, people like Steve would be finished. They are just as reliant on germ theory as a business model as the jab pushers are. And, judging by old mate Kev’s colourful vernacular, they are cut from the same moral cloth.
Also it's quite clear from the correspondence above that him, his mates Roger and Kevin, fight dirty. So this is clearly, exactly, all that (t)he(y) deserve(s).
I hope you know that I was referring to their comments, not yours. I don't envy you, reading that drivel all the time. And I struggle to understand how these people thought that such coarse discourse could be even remotely helpful. Likely, being helpful never entered their minds. Regardless, I, and others, remain grateful for your efforts in these difficult times. Thank you.
I don't know as much as Christine, Sam, Mark, Stefan, Andy, Tom but I've noticed that they're not even prepared to take me on re facts alone. Hence the attempts to bully me. Which you also see in Christine's correspondence. When it comes down to it they're eugenicists as well (as establishment) and want to make hay from it.
Steve Kirsch you're going to hate this but I was just looking at my stats and I've only had 6 visits from Sage's, and Frances', blogs in the last 3 months.
And one paid subscriber from one of them. You should pay by piece rate. Cheers.
Jul 26, 2022·edited Jul 26, 2022Liked by Richard Seager
I know that I am missing the point (of the spear) but in these parts *ass* is a donkey, unfortunately not to be confused with that donkey/horse infertile offspring, the mule; whereas arse is a rear end.
All three very apt terms for what's going on.
Edit: to clarify, calling someone a silly ass is not as offensive as to say silly arse.
Of all the posters to Substack I've done most of those things that she suggests doing. I've critiqued the monsters here, I've written the FOI (or OIAs) to MPs, I've directly confronted re masks and if I had a spare million or two I'd have my own (or our own) 20 hectares already and would be growing (more) stuff.
So no the directness is fine, I took no exception. But I don't know how removing yourself into the wild helps those in the cities.
I am trying to curate a substack that both informs and is friendly enough to attract readership. Otherwise the informing is wasted. And having the likes of Sage or Liz/Lilly threatening me while using your text to do so is something that I intend to make sure is not supported.
So you're welcome to be part of that informing but please make sure that you're not part of that 'police knocking on my door'.
Jul 30, 2022·edited Jul 30, 2022Liked by Richard Seager
I wouldnt be surprised if Steve eventually decides to delete that article entirely. Based on my observation, there are FAR more people telling him to basically pound sand, yet "our side" is still somehow more coherent & respectful, and "their side" is belligerent and divisive resorting to logical fallacies.... which is only making people more curious about terrain theory 😂 Oops!
Anyway, I have been wanting to export that entire thread for safekeeping but my brand new $1,000 laptop just crashed on me & has no operating system apparently installed now (thanks, HP) so all I have is my extremely old & outdated phone that also isn't doing so hot.
(BTW, ive seen your comments here & there, and you crack me up 😂 good arguments too. Ive subbed to you )
My stats show that despite all the libels and the whole drama that ensued that only 6 stackers from each of both the Sage and the Frances blogs bothered to follow up on the spurious charges and visit my blog. I get more visits from obscure parts of the internet than that. And if you check the Frances blog it's full of one or three follow accounts, one always being Frances and the others maybe mine or one other account. In other words they both know the game of socks and although the Sage blog seems to be busier of the two it's not if you count the follow up visits to my account.
Igor Chudov is a good site to compare to. Quite popular, wary of giving up on germ theory and therefore unlikely to provoke Pharma Inc and obviously not using such 'faking my popularity' tactics and his subscribe account is 'hundreds of paid accounts'. Can't see why Robert would have 50 times Igor's, Igor's also being the more substantial of the two blogs.
Also a good reason why if not elected to council this year that my blog has until mid October to get to a thousand paid subscribers. And it's not even at a thousand subscribers free and paid yet.
I thought you meant email. Arn't you lucky? I've never had a reply from Steve except for allusions to obscure Simon & Garfunkel songs (I know they're not obscure but the song was).
Also what was the original version, did you want to trawl it out of your proton account?
I'm not liking on your posts btw even if I agree with them. Because they too often get edited with an addition of something like "and it's certainly not like South Americans were genocided by that sweet abrahamic never industrially associated "freemason" lovin')?"
Frank this is sailing too close to the new rule of no ad hominems. If you're going to critique somebody you have to give reasons, and don't just make them up. Link or substantiate.
I thought MidWestern Doctor's essay was reasonably presented, if long, but in general I don't care. It's extraneous to the philosophical, legal and moral crux of refusing induction into the Medical Mythology. The Greater Good rationale is a hammer cracking all nuts. Some people do believe, most have never heard of exosomes as cellular detritus and will only be bewildered. Maybe that's a strategy of befuddlement. https://amidwesterndoctor.substack.com/p/thoughts-on-the-existence-of-viruses/comment/7953070
Shall have a look. And yes, probably.
Who knows what will bring people in to the anti-vcxx cult? Maybe no guns, no gurus, no germs is a hook.
I have only sped read MidWestern Doctor to now. Quite a long read for somebody who wasn't going to write about it. Not a trivial exercise in writing.
I've commented several times on the length of his posts. Suggested he make it a Game of Thrones serial instead. To be honest I'm not sure it matters why people resist. If they know enough to NO!, that's good enough.
I agree. Always have. Just not sure why we can't have the debate about it or why it causes so much conflict. I mean I got to Terrain via retroviruses, the "Spanish Flu", Stefan Lanka, old and new books on the subject, and likely a bit of a lifelong opposition to 'modern medicine'. But anyone asking the same questions in the last 6 months will just end up attracting abuse.
We're still all lumped as anti-vaxxers, so might as well embrace the tin foil hat.
If viruses were ever proven to not be real and/or pathogenic and contagious, people like Steve would be finished. They are just as reliant on germ theory as a business model as the jab pushers are. And, judging by old mate Kev’s colourful vernacular, they are cut from the same moral cloth.
Classy, that.
30 good expletives needed a reply at some stage.
Also it's quite clear from the correspondence above that him, his mates Roger and Kevin, fight dirty. So this is clearly, exactly, all that (t)he(y) deserve(s).
Great please everyone pronouns Rich. LOL
I know you are doing plurals. Haha.
I hope you know that I was referring to their comments, not yours. I don't envy you, reading that drivel all the time. And I struggle to understand how these people thought that such coarse discourse could be even remotely helpful. Likely, being helpful never entered their minds. Regardless, I, and others, remain grateful for your efforts in these difficult times. Thank you.
I wasn't sure. And thanks too for the support.
I don't know as much as Christine, Sam, Mark, Stefan, Andy, Tom but I've noticed that they're not even prepared to take me on re facts alone. Hence the attempts to bully me. Which you also see in Christine's correspondence. When it comes down to it they're eugenicists as well (as establishment) and want to make hay from it.
Steve Kirsch you're going to hate this but I was just looking at my stats and I've only had 6 visits from Sage's, and Frances', blogs in the last 3 months.
And one paid subscriber from one of them. You should pay by piece rate. Cheers.
What's Mathew Crawford's email address doing being included.
Isn't he the guy who started the pack dogs on you Rich.
He was the first. I asked the same question. And was told that Steve included him.
Crawford writes about crypto currency and so does Steve.
The plot thickens.
I know that I am missing the point (of the spear) but in these parts *ass* is a donkey, unfortunately not to be confused with that donkey/horse infertile offspring, the mule; whereas arse is a rear end.
All three very apt terms for what's going on.
Edit: to clarify, calling someone a silly ass is not as offensive as to say silly arse.
Aren’t you thin-skinned! Personal vendetta much?
And who are you exactly?
I am the Authority.
And I would have thought kind of thick skinned really. Considering.
Sailing close to the wind there Frank. I'll let it go though.
Would be good if you could detail those pharma investments which I'm sure that he has. Might save a few hours of my research time.
Thanks. And Jo (or maybe J O) is trying to pass themselves off as Jo Waller. But that seems far from the case.
Somebody else suggested they were fraudulent. A lot of it about.
I am. And have been for a while. It's obviously not Jo Waller and yet they persist with the attempt to pass themselves off as so.
I still have not raised a response from Steve ever. And I even asked him a Q on that thread of yours, where he answered you twice.
What's the secret?
BTW I've left a response for moonmaiden. I wonder what actions moonmaiden has done. Posted to Substack maybe?
Of all the posters to Substack I've done most of those things that she suggests doing. I've critiqued the monsters here, I've written the FOI (or OIAs) to MPs, I've directly confronted re masks and if I had a spare million or two I'd have my own (or our own) 20 hectares already and would be growing (more) stuff.
So no the directness is fine, I took no exception. But I don't know how removing yourself into the wild helps those in the cities.
Have the police knocked at your door, Frank?
I am trying to curate a substack that both informs and is friendly enough to attract readership. Otherwise the informing is wasted. And having the likes of Sage or Liz/Lilly threatening me while using your text to do so is something that I intend to make sure is not supported.
So you're welcome to be part of that informing but please make sure that you're not part of that 'police knocking on my door'.
I wouldnt be surprised if Steve eventually decides to delete that article entirely. Based on my observation, there are FAR more people telling him to basically pound sand, yet "our side" is still somehow more coherent & respectful, and "their side" is belligerent and divisive resorting to logical fallacies.... which is only making people more curious about terrain theory 😂 Oops!
Anyway, I have been wanting to export that entire thread for safekeeping but my brand new $1,000 laptop just crashed on me & has no operating system apparently installed now (thanks, HP) so all I have is my extremely old & outdated phone that also isn't doing so hot.
(BTW, ive seen your comments here & there, and you crack me up 😂 good arguments too. Ive subbed to you )
My stats show that despite all the libels and the whole drama that ensued that only 6 stackers from each of both the Sage and the Frances blogs bothered to follow up on the spurious charges and visit my blog. I get more visits from obscure parts of the internet than that. And if you check the Frances blog it's full of one or three follow accounts, one always being Frances and the others maybe mine or one other account. In other words they both know the game of socks and although the Sage blog seems to be busier of the two it's not if you count the follow up visits to my account.
Suggest Steve's blog somewhat the same.
What get's me is Malone's 'tens of thousands of paid accounts'. Sure Robert.
Igor Chudov is a good site to compare to. Quite popular, wary of giving up on germ theory and therefore unlikely to provoke Pharma Inc and obviously not using such 'faking my popularity' tactics and his subscribe account is 'hundreds of paid accounts'. Can't see why Robert would have 50 times Igor's, Igor's also being the more substantial of the two blogs.
Also a good reason why if not elected to council this year that my blog has until mid October to get to a thousand paid subscribers. And it's not even at a thousand subscribers free and paid yet.
Well post it up. But if it's ad hominem I'll delete it albeit I won't ban you for 30 days.
I thought you meant email. Arn't you lucky? I've never had a reply from Steve except for allusions to obscure Simon & Garfunkel songs (I know they're not obscure but the song was).
Also what was the original version, did you want to trawl it out of your proton account?
i.e.
edited 16 min ago
Author
The Awakening - The Sound Of Silence (2014)
It's good.
Thanks.
I'm not liking on your posts btw even if I agree with them. Because they too often get edited with an addition of something like "and it's certainly not like South Americans were genocided by that sweet abrahamic never industrially associated "freemason" lovin')?"
How are the "girls" btw? Say hi for me.
His email is above.
Frank this is sailing too close to the new rule of no ad hominems. If you're going to critique somebody you have to give reasons, and don't just make them up. Link or substantiate.