When the foundations are destroyed …
So she said to me bluntly that some of her family had died with COVID. I asked her to clarify if she meant “with COVID” or “of or from COVID.” She gives me the response I get from so many, a shrug and a look of “aren’t they the same thing?” She rephrased her statement, as if the correction helps, to say that those family members had died of COVID. I think it was hard to hide my skepticism when I responded with “oh, really?” Soon after that, she was busy and had to go her way.
I walked away from that short and superficial discussion initially absorbing the sincerity and simple belief with which she had declared her statement of faith. For her, it was fact. And it was obvious that she had gone along with the common narrative. She was a mask wearer, having been injected with a needle, the contents of which she had no clue about. The notion of foreign travel made her uneasy feeling that other nations were more dubious due to the stories of the bug. So her family members dying with/of COVID fits the picture well. And that sincerity and simple belief can seem convincing. I wondered to myself, how can I hold to my doubts about the story when someone just told me that their family members died of the virus?
Thinking about it, I realised I had been here before. I was raised a christian, amongst people that had a sincere belief about the saving and healing power of Jesus Christ, his divinity and superiority, his suffering and sacrifice for them. They will stand up in front of crowds, in the midst of groups, and declare how Jesus did this and how Jesus did that. I’ve had this experience through all the years that I had forsaken the notion of Jesus, this simple acceptance of some position. And that’s only one example, one subject matter, that I have to deal with people of faith, the other occasions involving atheists and acolytes of scientism.
On one level, my life experience has taught me that sincerity is not evidence of truth. Again, sincerity is not evidence of truth. Simply because a person sincerely believes that they are right or portrays themself with sincerity, that doesn’t mean that they are correct. They could tell me something with no hint of deception or pretense, since they are wholly persuaded that they hold the truth. And yet what comes out of their mouths is utter falsehood. When you have invalid premises, a rotten foundation, then the conclusions, even when accurate, is still rooted in wrongness.
So, I sat in my car, thinking about what had just happened, and I realised why, at least currently, I could not be convinced by her sincerity, even if she came into my face and angrily declared her family members dead because of COVID. My problem lies at the very root of the tree. I’ve lost faith in the notion of viral contagion.
For me, I realise that the whole path of disease or the cause of it is fairly unknown to me. I know the stories. Believe me, I know the stories. I was raised knowing that I have to wash my hands so as not to spread germs and illness. I’ve seen many a time where a person sneezes or coughs or has some other expulsion and people are warned to not go near so as not to catch that illness. I was raised with that. But I only had the stories and I didn’t pay attention to the details of reality. The stories were used to interpret reality rather than having reality be the basis for the stories. There’s a significant difference in that.
So I know that people get sick. And I know that people can get sick around the same time, but not all of them. I remember when I was young, I thought my dad was kind of invincible because he never seemed to come down with any of the illnesses that other family members would get. In fact, thinking about it, my mum never really came down things the ailments us kids had. And even us children, we didn’t really get sick at the same time. There was never really a time where one kid got sick and then, within a reasonable time, the other sibling got the same illness. Damn, my own life should have refuted the notion of fundamental segments of germ theory. But no, remember, I was using the stories to interpret reality rather than making reality or at least the experience of it the basis of the stories I hold to. So I still washed my hands to get rid of the germs and avoided coughs and sneezes purposefully.
So people close to me are really into the belief in the virus, going over the top with making sure that things are clean and washed and covered and protected to make sure no one gets sick (even though people still get sick). But, as I’ve said, this current COVID story has forced me to actually think about what I know. Here’s the story that I used to hold as true to interpret disease. So some invisible thing would be in someone else and they were sick because of it. That thing was not originally part of their body, but somehow it got in and they were sick because of it. Now somehow, because they cough or sneeze, or because it’s on their skin and they touch something, the invisible thing gets out and come into contact with me. Then this invisible thing gets into my body and causes the same disease. The common evidence for this story is the common cold or the flu, seasonal diseases.
Before I go any further, that last part, “seasonal disease,” should have been a red flag already. I mean, if these things get into our bodies through coughs, sneezes and surface contact, then why would the season matter? These things should be all-year problems, not just in the winter. Anyway, remember, the story interpreted experience. So, I was just blindly following.
So, anyway, what’s my problem with this story of contagion? If I switch things and focus on my experience, then I’ve never experienced a single part of the story. Not one part. This invisible thing? Well it’s invisible and doesn’t hit any of my senses. And as I said to someone, if it’s invisible, how do I know it’s there? How do I know how it moves? No, fundamentally, how do I know it’s even there? To be blunt, I don’t.
Now that is doubt right there. I don’t have to cite or refer to different theories of disease, such as terrain theory or miasma theory or polymorphism. My own experience cuts at the root of the story.
Now with this rethink, it didn’t help to learn not only of other understanding of how disease is caused, but also experiments that call into question whether germ or viral or contagion theory was ever proved. In the year 1919, there were experiments regarding the spread of influenza, one in Boston and the other in a place called Angel Island, both in North America. There, “volunteers” were subjected to multiple ways of getting into contact with the presumed influenza invisible thing, a bacterium or virus, such as injections, smears up the nose and throat, even rooms with influenza sufferers where they came into close physical contact, breathing their air and sucking in their coughs, etc. But no matter what they tried, the illness wouldn’t spread. Here’s a quote from a relevant source.
Perhaps the most interesting epidemiological studies conducted during the 1918–1919 pandemic were the human experiments conducted by the Public Health Service and the U.S. Navy under the supervision of Milton Rosenau on Gallops Island, the quarantine station in Boston Harbor, and on Angel Island, its counterpart in San Francisco. The experiment began with 100 volunteers from the Navy who had no history of influenza. Rosenau was the first to report on the experiments conducted at Gallops Island in November and December 1918.69 His first volunteers received first one strain and then several strains of Pfeiffer’s bacillus by spray and swab into their noses and throats and then into their eyes. When that procedure failed to produce disease, others were inoculated with mixtures of other organisms isolated from the throats and noses of influenza patients. Next, some volunteers received injections of blood from influenza patients. Finally, 13 of the volunteers were taken into an influenza ward and exposed to 10 influenza patients each. Each volunteer was to shake hands with each patient, to talk with him at close range, and to permit him to cough directly into his face. None of the volunteers in these experiments developed influenza. Rosenau was clearly puzzled, and he cautioned against drawing conclusions from negative results. He ended his article in JAMA with a telling acknowledgement: “We entered the outbreak with a notion that we knew the cause of the disease, and were quite sure we knew how it was transmitted from person to person. Perhaps, if we have learned anything, it is that we are not quite sure what we know about the disease.”69 (p. 313)The State of Science, Microbiology, and Vaccines Circa 1918, John M. Eyler, PhD, found at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2862332/
Now the person leading the experiment cautioned against drawing conclusions. But as another scientist said, what was his name? … Ah, Feynman. Richard P. Feynman. “It doesn’t matter how beautiful your theory is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are. If it doesn’t agree with experiment, it’s wrong.” So there was a position that bacteria or viruses cause disease. Yet in the presence of such bacteria/virus, the disease was not caused. Therefore, the bacteria/virus isn’t the cause of the disease. The guy may be afraid to draw such a conclusion. But I think his experiment does put a big question mark over the germ theory, if not totally refuting it.
So if I already see my experience not conforming to the germ theory idea, and there are actual experiments that don’t conform to the germ theory idea, then on what basis do I believe in contagion?
I know what some may say, what my shadow self would say, that the evidence is that people get sick at around the same time. Ok, to say that properly, some people get sick around the same time. But that’s not a proof of contagion only of season, only of similar environmental factors cause similar effect on some humans. But that doesn’t prove that an invisible something made it all happen. It’s not even evidence of it. The fact that other people don’t get sick refutes the idea that the causative factor is the invisible bug, as there is no realistic way to isolate that healthy person from the bug that should be everywhere, especially in schools. You should know, … Well, at least I learnt that in the mainstream narrative, viruses are so small that they have the movement of air fluidity and therefore could be anywhere in the air, and germs are small enough to get splattered onto all forms of surfaces. In fact, those who know the common narrative really well would know that so-called viruses and germs are already part of the human body’s bio-system, working with it. So these invisible things are everywhere. How could anyone isolate from that? How could a mask protect from that? Yet some people are fine and some people get sick in various seasons. That, again, pokes a hole into the story I was raised with, the narrative that surrounds me, that I’m supposed to believe in.
So the foundation is cracked and crumbled. And that should be before I hear of and read reports that the virus controlling today’s narrative, SARS-Cov-2, has never been isolated/purified, never been shown not to be in healthy people but only sick people (“asymptomatic carriers” shits on that idea), never been shown to be the cause of the illness or disease called COVID-19.
So without the foundational position that Jesus is any real cause of forgiveness or salvation, if someone comes up to me and says “Jesus saved my life,” exuding all the simple sincerity in the world, the statement is meaningless and the sincerity is based on imagination. How else could I see it? And if someone says that COVID killed their family members, it too must be meaningless, based on imagination. Both are based on ignorance.
“But the test came up positive!” But SARS-Cov-2 has never been proven to be the cause of any disease. In fact, it hasn’t even been shown to exist as it hasn’t been purified! So what good is the test? The test is useless. And if COVID-19 is a set of symptoms said to be caused by an agent never proven to exist, then … the claim is meaningless.
“But there have been so many deaths!” Hearsay! Added to that, if the deaths were said to be caused by an agent that has never been shown to be the cause of any illness, then the claim is baseless.
“But if it really exists, and you act as normal, that could have some real consequences!” Unicorns, evil spirits, leprechauns, fairies, Santa Claus, the Illuminati, human-kidnapping aliens, cursed items. If any of these exist, and I act as if they don’t that could have some real consequences. So what? Based on the movies and the claims, letting loose an evil spirit from a curse item can have real impact on lots of people. Acting as if the Illuminati doesn’t exist is just to cement their hold in the world.
Look, first prove that the thing exists before we start talking about consequences. And if you already believe it exists without necessary evidence, then you’re just part of a cult. No apologies.
“The only reason you don’t believe is because you don’t have access to a special microscope that would make such entities visible.” I saw this sort of argument on a forum. Someone claimed that the reason why certain people reject the germ theory or that virus cause disease is that they haven’t seen such things under a special microscope called an electron-microscope. In response, I could say that the comment is patently false since my life experience says a lot more to me than seeing something under a microscope. Added to that, others have looked through those microscopes and still do not see what is seen as evidence of germ theory. The fact is that what is seen can be interpreted in various ways. Added to that, seeing something under a microscope doesn’t tell the whole story. It doesn’t tell you the source of the blobs you see there. I think a lot more praise is given to such a device and vision than it is worth.
So without the belief in contagion, without belief in the invisible things that possess a body and can wreak havoc, especially with the lack of relevant evidence, I just can’t give the stories any credence, especially when the stories are held by people who are normally ignorant of the details, just holding on to stories because they are popular or because a supposed authority figure stated it. Investigation normally seems to stop just there. That’s why pressing people with questions normally ends in silence, abrupt end of conversation, or emotional outbursts. Actual proof and evidence, actual rational scrutiny of the base claims, was never part of the equation.