by Tobin Owl

Editorial note: This is an op-ed article. The Nevermore Collective does not maintain a position on the existence or non-existence of viruses.

Do these images tell you what these particles are and what they do? (1, 2)

Control experiments conducted by an independent German laboratory during the Bardens vs. Lanka measles virus trials of 2015-2016 confirm that the assumption that “viruses cause disease” has no scientific basis. Ever since advent of modern virology in 1954, when Enders proposed that he had isolated a measles virus in cell cultures, the whole world of virology has followed his methods of “detecting” the existence of “viruses” by visually observed in virtro cytopathic effects, without conducting control experiments to determine whether it is indeed a “virus” or whether it is the conditions of tissue starvation and antibiotics added to the tissues in the experiments that causes the cells to exhibit cytopathic effects.

“A large part of our academic science works like this: A theory is invented, it is always argued inside the theory, they call it science and claim that this represents the reality. In reality, it just represents a postulated theory”

—Dr. Stephen Lanka, “The Misconception Called Virus”, p. 4

Experiments without controls do not meet present day international standards of science, yet systematic controls continue to be omitted whenever it is wished to show that a virus exists and/or is the cause of a disease, etc. (as well as to show that vaccines are safe). The whole world of virology has followed down Enders’ path of assumption. Yet if no controls are conducted, there is no real science. It can only be classified as either fanciful assumptions or fraud.

Lanka, a German molecular and marine biologist with published research in the field of virology, announced on his website on November of 2011 that he would award € 100,000 to anyone who presented him with a scientific paper proving the existence of a measles virus:

“The reward will be paid, if a scientific publication is presented, in which the existence of the measles virus is not only asserted, but also proven and in which, among other things, the diameter of the measles virus is determined.”

He was taken up on the offer the following January by a young medical doctor, Dr. David Bardens, who presented six papers proposing to “prove” the existence of the measles virus, and suggested Lanka simply hand over the reward:

“I replied to the young doctor (who urgently recommended to me to waive the (indeed) costly legal dispute and immediately pay him the prize money) that in none of the publications was there any identifiable viral structure, but rather easily recognizable typical cellular particles and structures. Thereupon he filed a suit with the Ravensburg Local Court, however, without submitting the six publications to the court.”​

—Lanka, ibid., p. 9

Since the 1990s, Lanka, along with other scientists, has been contesting the scientific rigor of modern virus theory and methodology. These scientists have contested that the diseases under the umbrella of AIDS, and other supposed ‘viral diseases’, are caused by viruses. Lanka saw a civil suit as an opportunity to bring the historical faultiness of viral theory to public attention.

“The background of the measles trial, which began in 2011, was to prevent the planned compulsory measles vaccinations. A former Federal Justice minister had called and asked for scientific data to help stop the introduction of mandatory vaccination. A leading senior state prosecutor gave us the idea to offer a prize for the proof of the ‘measles virus’ and, in the subsequent civil trial, to legally establish that there is no scientific evidence for the claims that the measles virus exists and that vaccines were safe and effective. Our plan was entirely successful. This is easily understandable if one knows why the paper by John Franklin Enders et al. dated 1 June 1954 became the only and exclusive basis of the entire new genetic virology of the ‘live virus’ vaccine production after the old virology had died a naural death in 1951-1952.”​

—Lanka, ibid., p. 9

The ad hoc ruling of the Ravensburg Court

On March 12, 2015, the Ravensburg Local Court, under presiding judge Matthias Schneider, made an ad hoc ruling without examining the evidence (which was never formally submitted by the plaintiff), without abiding proper civil process, and without giving Lanka an opportunity to offer any rebuttal to the court-appointed expert. In Lanka’s words, the judge “panicked.” The judge ordered Lanka “to pay the prize money of 100,000 €, together with high interest, all expenses and the high costs of the expert witness.” (See Lanka, “The Federal Court of Justice destroys the belief in Viruses,” translated by Corona Investigative August 28, 2020)

Lanka’s defeat in the lower court was broadly published in international news, including the BBC and many other major news outlets, who all together trumpeted the triumph of the establishment, of viruses, and of vaccines and shamed the outlandish biologist who had dared to assert that disease-causing viruses don’t exist. To date, a quick Google search will turn up many of these 2015 publications. Scarcely detectable amidst the thick smokescreen of Google & Co.’s algorithmic, pro-propaganda results are the rare documents, blog articles, etc. giving details of what happened next…

Lanka’s appeal to the Court of Stuttgart

Lanka presented his appeal to the Higher Regional Court of Stuttgart (HRC), which was fully allowed by said court. On February 16, 2016, the court ruled in his favor and against Bardens in a unanimous ruling, 3:0. Those who wish to dismiss the real significance of this ruling claim that the only reason Bardens was denied was a formality: that he had submitted six papers instead of one. They simply repeat what Bardens himself had invented. But such a supposition ignores important aspects of the proceedings and of the ruling.

“… on 02/16/2016, interesting things happened at the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court that the media did not report. At the beginning of the hearing, the presiding judge Karl-Heinz Oleschkewitz criticized the plaintiff for acting highly irresponsibly by filing and maintaining the suit. The court proved to the plaintiff, the physician Dr. med. David Bardens from Homburg, that he himself had not read the six publications which are supposed to contain the proof of the ‘measles virus’ and which he named before the Regional Court of Ravensburg as proof of the existence of the measles virus. Bardens confessed.”​

—Lanka, The Federal Court of Justice Destroys Belief in Viruses

According to Lanka, the court-appointed witness in the court of first instance, Prof. Podblielski, had said in writing on “page 27 of his expertise dated November 17, 2014”:

“Thereby, however, the validity of a single one of the 6 articles is not sufficient, but the statements of combinations of the 6 articles are necessary for the proof .”

—(cited in Lanka, ibid.)

But the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court made it clear that Prof. Podblielski’s argument was bogus. Six papers which individually do not prove anything at all scientifically, which lack controls and therefore have no scientific basis, do not create proof when considered together:

“That for the proof of the alleged existence of the measles virus ‘the statements from combinations of the 6 articles are necessary for the proof’, the HRC Stuttgart rejects for legal, logical and scientific reasons decidedly and unanimously, 3:0.Prof. Podbielski’s construct of making scientific evidence out of six unproven facts, which the Regional Court of Ravensburg followed, was rejected by the Court of Appeal with detailed reasons in paragraphs 82, 85 and 86 of the written judgement. Thus, it was judicially determined and is now German jurisdiction, which can no longer be doubted, that none of the six publications contains any proof of the existence of the ‘measles virus.’” —Lanka, ibid.

Moreover, since the first of the six publications under consideration was J.F. Enders, et al.’s initial paper (Enders JF, Peebles TC. Propagation in tissue cultures of cytopathogenic agents from patients with measles. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1954 Jun;86(2):277–286.), for which he won the Nobel prize and which became the foundation of all subsequent 30,000 papers on the measles virus as well as the entire theory and methodology of modern genetic virology, the proof presented in the trials and the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court’s ruling pulls the cornerstone out from under the entire edifice of viral assumption (that viruses exist and cause disease) and causes modern virology’s house of cards to collapse into the remnants of pure fancy. In Lanka’s words, the court, “elegantly exposed, now legally effective, the misbelief in the ‘measles virus’, in the transmissibility of ‘measles’ and in the possibility and effectiveness of the so-called ‘measles vaccinations’. Not between the lines, but in the lines of the judgement, the facts can be read that all claims about all disease-causing viruses have been refuted.” (Lanka, ibid.)

“What is a ‘scientific fact’? A small case study: The ‘measles process'” by Harald Walach (includes Walach’s independent analysis of each of the six papers presented by Bardens) → read

The German Federal Court of Justice confirms the Stuttgart ruling

Bardens, not content with the court’s clear ruling, spent tens of thousands of euros in legal fees to attempt to counter the opinion of the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court. His appeal was soundly rejected by the German Federal Court of Justice (FCJ) on December 1, 2016:

“The plaintiff’s appeal … is dismissed because the case has no fundamental significance, the complaints based on the infringement of fundamental procedural rights are not upheld …”

—FCJ’s determination (cited in Lanka, ibid.)

“… the HRC/FCJ case law on the ‘measles virus’ is significant in that today all ‘disease-causing viruses’ are ‘detected’ with the method introduced by Enders in 1954. This method, which Enders described in mid-1954 as ‘speculation to be regarded with extreme caution’, became a ‘scientific fact’ and the model and standard for all current methods of detecting ‘pathogenic viruses’ when Enders was awarded the Nobel Prize on December 10, 1954. On February 16, 2016, the HRC Stuttgart not only wrote world history on the ‘measles virus’, but also refuted the ‘scientific nature’ of the claims of existence of all ‘disease-causing viruses’ and the usefulness of the ‘protective’ vaccinations.”​

—Lanka, ibid. (emphasis mine)

“Dr. Bardens, worldwide the only young physician with his own entry on Wikipedia, knew all scientific refutations, the refutations by the four counter-opinions, the refutation of the expert by himself, the refutation of the ‘measles virus’ assertions by the RKI and the refutation of all ‘measles virus’ assertions by the compelling genetic counter-evidence of the fifth expert opinion, which is obvious to everyone. The ‘genes’ of the ‘measles virus’ are in fact the ‘genes’ of completely normal, healthy cells.”

—Lanka, ibid.

An appeal to all scientists, virologists, health care professionals and reasonable people

Is it not reasonable that control experiments should be conducted in conjunction with all research concerning any supposed pathogen (including viruses), or any medical intervention (including vaccines)? It is not only reasonable, it represents a minimum of compliance with international scientific standards.

Yet, habitually such control experiments are never even attempted, whilst the scientists involved believe they have detected viruses, or parts thereof (or, on the other hand, when it is wished to show a vaccine is safe, unvaccinated control groups are never studied). As long as control experiments are not done, science is no longer science, but rather fantasy or deception, and we can never know the true nature of human health or disease.

Additionally, we will be subject to distortions of false epidemics and pandemics created by scheming billionaires, vaccine manufacturers and bureaucrats who exploit the population’s fear of the invisible to push their agendas of control and human experimentation, of social engineering for the profit of a few, and the restriction of natural rights, freedom of association, and freedom of information. As long as control experiments are not done and their results faithfully made known to the public and the professional community, the population will be subject to medical fraud and injurious medical interventions that violate the accords of the Nuremburg Code in the wake of Nazi Germany’s human medical experiments.

In “The Virus Misconception Part 2 – The beginning and end of the corona crisis”, Lanka makes his appeal for control experiments to be carried out with regard to the supposed “coronavirus”:

“I appeal herewith to biochemists, bioinformaticians, virologists and cell culture specialists to encourage them to carry out the aforementioned control experiments, to publish the results and get in touch with me. i myself have designed a control ex-periment which discards from the very beginning the possible excuse that the genetic material might become contaminated with sArs-CoV-2 prior or after the control experiment.”

Results of control experiments commissioned by Stefan Lanka

As mentioned at the beginning of this article, Lanka commisioned an independent laboratory to conduct control experiments on the cytopathic effect in cell cultures attributed to the presence of “measles virus.” I was able to find the following information on the experiments in a translated article entitled Open Appeal to Virologists :

The author of the article goes on to point out:

Some persons, including Jeremy Hammond of Children’s Health Defense, claim with regard to SARS-CoV-2 that control experiments have been documented in some papers claiming isolation of the virus. In this case, it should be clarified that what is needed are systemic control experiments, i.e. well-documented experiments that leave little room for doubt that researchers assumptions about the alleged virus are not mistaken through self-deception. To try to disprove oneself is the obligation of any honest scientist.

If the reader knows of any scientific papers on SARS-CoV-2 where convincing, well-documented control experiments are described, please leave a comment below this article, including a complete excerpt of the description of controls and their results, and I will do my best to look into it.

During the measles virus trials, control experiments commissioned by Stefan Lanka described above were preformed showing that for the famous cytopathic effect (CPE) in cell cultures to occur, no addition of an alleged “virus isolate” was needed. This represented only one step in the conventional methods for “isolation and characterization of pathogenic viruses.” With the alleged coronavirus pandemic, Lanka again commisioned experiments to be undertaken by an independent German laboratory, but this time the intention is for control experiments to be performed paralleling all of seven procedures used by virologists in the characterization of the alleged SARS-CoV-2 virus. The video below discusses the results of the first of these control experiments: CPE…

Watch on Odysee

A writeup on the CPE control experiment described in the video above can be found in German in the February, 2021 edition of Wissenschafftplus magazine (downloadable here), pp. 52-57.

The next phase of the control experiments is genome sequencing. The last I’ve seen of this (Feb. 10, 2021), they were waiting for a bioiformatician with access to the raw sequence data from China:

What is missing now are bioinformaticians who have mastered the De Novo alignment in “viruses” and have a way to get the raw sequence data from Fan Wu et al (“A new coronavirus associoated with human respiratory disease in China” – “Nature”, February 3, 2020) so that the original alignment of SARS-CoV-2 can be repeated and documented.

👉🏻 If you are a bioinformatician, contact us at: fragen@wplus-verlag.de


  • The claimed SARS-CoV-2 virus is only an alignment, a computer model → read
  • Corona: The comprehensible and verifiable refutation of the virus allegations → read
  • “I’m a Clincal Lab Scientist, COVID-19 is Fake, Wake Up America!” Dr. Derek Knauss read
  • CDC NOW admits NO ‘Gold Standard’ for the Isolation of Any Virus – Dr. Robert Young  → read
  • Statement on Virus Isolation – Sally Fallon, Tom Cowan, Andrew Kaufmann → read and sign

1,5 million € offered to any virologist who presents scientific proof of the existence of a corona virus, including documented control experiments of all steps taken in the proof → Isolate the Truth Fund

But what about … ?

But what about PCR and antibody tests? Don’t these tests prove the existences of viruses? What about biolabs and bioweapons?

What about PolioAidsCoronavirus, etc.?

The patient investigator can discover answers that satisfy most or all of these questions. In short, diseases that have been shackled to an assumption of being caused by ‘viruses’ are simply syndromes –a set of symptoms with a medical name, symptom pictures that frequently have a number of different causes–while proof that these symptoms are caused by a specific virus or pathogen is lacking. PCR and antibody tests, meanwhile, are not specific and do not test for viruses at all. PCR is an amplification technique with the capacity, if used correctly, to show the presence of very short amino acids, but never the intact sequence of a so-called virus. Antibody testing depends on the assumption that the “antibodies” (immunoglobulins) are produced in response to an actual known body (eg. a virus), but like the very short proteins detected by PCR, these “antibodies” cannot show the presence of an actual “virus.” If no virus has ever been competently identified and proven to exist, asking ‘”antibodies” to prove the existence of said “virus” is putting the horse before the cart.

Below this article, I will provide a compendium of resources for anyone who desires to look deeper into these questions.

On the current mass censorship campaign

Over the past year, I’ve watched as Youtube, Facebook, and other mainstream platforms have censored thousands of scientists, doctors, epidemiologists, investigative journalists, etc. Google, in turn, has shadow-banned natural health websites, and content creators who don’t conform to the official narratives have even had their websites shut down by web providers like Squarespace, Amazon Web Services, etc.

Meanwhile “fact-checkers” tend to show considerable bias and often mislead by omission. Wikipedia, which has been repeatedly shown to cater to special interests (particularly to the pharmaceutical industry), omits significant information about the measles virus trials, and the Wikipedia page on Lanka first associates him with “pseudoscience” and then completely omits any mention of the virus trials at all, while Bardens’ Wikipedia page is all about the virus trials. (Why else would anyone care who Bardens is?)

In The Virus Misconception, Part II, Lanka points to an antecedant to the current mass censorship campaign. Though this information is specific to Germany, the implications are global.

During the 2009 swine flu pandemic, a vaccine was produced to supposedly deal with the “virus”, but the vaccine adjuvant, which could only be mixed with the vaccine immediately before administering, contained nanoparticles that had not been tested…

“The story reached its climax as soon as the information spread among the public opinion that the chancellor Angela Merkel and the German army would get the same vaccine but without the adjuvants, while the police and the general population would be vaccinated with the vaccine containing nanoparticles that the human body cannot metabolize and eliminate.

In the end, 93% of the population rejected the vaccine, which was then administered to the other 7%. The overall refusal magically wiped out overnight all references to the virus in the media while the German government was busy burning millions of un-used vaccine vials.

The swine flu pandemic was not planned well enough to ensure massive vaccinations, but this did not prevent all involved epidemiologists, infectiologists and virologists to draw the necessary conclusions. they analyzed the causes and published their conclusions and recommendations for the future in the edition no. 12, dated December 2010, of the German Federal Health Bulletin under the meaningful title “Pandemics, Lessons Learned”. Which basically means: the lessons that we learned from the swine flu H1N1 failure!

Some of the articles included in that edition are available on the internet, however the most important ones are not to be found. Thus, the crucial recommendations for the management of a pandemic are the following:

– Making sure that experts do not contradict themselves in public discussions.

– Early involvement of mass and social media.

– Control of the internet. This is to avoid that any statement or criticism that

weakens the consensus and acceptance of the measures adopted by politicians in the name of society.

These recommendations were meticulously implemented this time, the internet is censored and critics are being kept at bay and discredited. Any argument that challenges the official truth about the pandemic and manages to reach the public opinion … is ignored. In fact, each country has its own government speaker giving the daily update of the corona crisis.”


A shorter version of this article is available in Spanish providing additional links and videos.

Also, a Spanish flyer PDF of the article is available for print.

Supplemental materials:

General

The Misinterpretation of the Antibodies” with Dr Stefan Lanka (PDF here)

PCR – A critical examination by Raphael Haumann

PCR Tests Made Easy – Dr. Sam Bailey

(Many More thoroughly researched videos and articles by Sam Bailey can be found on her popular website with 20 million views and over 300,000 subscribers.)

My own contributions are not for those who wish to repeat dogma; they are for those who value open discussions and the courage to forge their own path.

Dr. Sam Bailey

Gain of Function Gaslighting
Watch on Bitchute
Gain of Function Garbage
Watch on Brand New Tube
The Viral Delusion is a five-part documentary series featuring Andrew Kaufman, Tom Cowan, Stefan Lanka, Stefan Scoglio, and others.

How the Theory of Deadly Microbes Took Power in Medicine and in Society by Herbert Ludwig

Timeline of Germ Theory and Its Detractors by Tobin Owl

Hoodwinking the Public: Statistical Maneuvers and Misrepresentation of Disease by
Medical Institutions and Their Allies in Bureaucracy
 by Tobin Owl (unfinished draft)

Measles Virus Trials

A Case of German Measles,from The Ruling Class Observer

The Virus Misconception Part 1 – Measles as an example – by Dr Stefan Lanka (PDF here)

La existencial del virus sarampión nunca se ha demostrado– Jesus Garcia Blanca

(The above article and others I found in Spanish have many details on the measles virus proceedings that I didn’t find in any of the English language articles I read. For more links, see my article in Spanish.)

The Flu (including the “1918 Flu”)

The video below includes a discussion of failed experiments carried out during the 1918 Flu attempting to demonstrate transmission…

Watch on Odysee

Polio

Central nervous system diseases other than polio continue in the U.S. and throughout the world: acute flaccid paralysis, chronic fatigue syndrome, encephalitis, meningitis, muscular sclerosis, and rarely in humans, rabies.“–Jim West

Pesticides and Polio: A Critique of the Scientific Literature by Jim West

Is Human Poliomyelitis Caused By An Exogenous Virus? by Ralph R. Scobey, M.D. (1954)

Polio, Pesticides and Silent Spring (short video with Spanish subtitles)

What then can cause Polio?” an extract from the book Fear of the Invisible by Janine Roberts

HIV/AIDS

HIV-AIDS, is not a Viral Disease, it’s a Metabolic Syndrome by Dr. Biswaroop Roy Chowdhury

No Panic – Dr Stefan Lanka on Bird Flu, AIDS and the Corruption of Medicine(2006, PDF here)

See the source image
Watch on Odysee
(All iterations of this excellent, eye-opening documentary have recently been removed from YouTube)

Scientific and medical articles on the HIV/AIDS hypothesis can be found on The Perth Group website.

Rethinking AIDS, which began with an association of world-class scientists in the 1980s/90s, is transitionally changing its name to Rethinking AIDS/Unmasking Covid

More alternative information on AIDS can be found at virusmyth.com

SARS

SARS: Corona virus first act – Corona Investigative

What happened to SARS-1? (video) by Dr. Sam Bailey

Covid-19

How a single misinterpretation on January 10, 2020, led the whole world astrayJorg Berg

Leading Corona researchers admit that they have no scientific proof for the existence of a virus  –Corona Investigative

“I’m a Clincal Lab Scientist, COVID-19 is Fake, Wake Up America!”  – Dr. Derek Knauss

Italian Nobel candidate (Stefan Scoglio) Not Sure This Virus Exists by Enza Ferreri

The claimed SARS-CoV-2 virus is only an alignment, a computer model —Corona Investigative

Corona: The comprehensible and verifiable refutation of the virus allegations –Corona Investigative

Destroying the Narrative: 40 Reasons Why a COVID-19 Pandemic Never Existed — Global Research

The Drug Tragedy by Torsten Engelbrecht & Dr. Claus Köhnlein

The Evidence – ‘You stayed at home, to protect the NHS, but they gave Midazolam to the Elderly and told you they were Covid Deaths’ — The Exposé

The causers of the corona crisis are clearly identified: Virologists who claim disease-causing viruses are science fraudsters and must be prosecuted — Dr. Stefan Lanka (May 2020)

Virologist Dr. Lanka presses charges against Christian Drosten — Corona Investigative

The Virus Misconception Part 2 – The beginning and end of the corona crisis – by Dr Stefan Lanka (PDF here)

Deus Ex Machina and the Invention of “SARS-CoV-2” – Dr. Mark Bailey

Warning Signs You’ve Been Tricked By Virologists – Dr. Mark Bailey (This article gets into the nitty-gritty of the alleged isolation of SARS-CoV-2; for anyone who wishes to get into technical details)

Full video can be watched on Odysee
In this interview, Corbett describes his background as a nurse in an AIDS ward. After minute 33, the discussion turns toward Covid-19 and the paradigm of establishment-sponsored dogma in medicine.
Watch on Odysee

Books

Virus Mania: How the Medical Industry Continually Invents Epidemics, Making Billion-Dollar Profits At Our Expense -Torsten Engelbrecht, Dr. Claus Köhnlein, Dr. Samantha Bailey MD, Dr. Stefano Scogio BSc Phd

See the source image
Sam Bailey is co-author of the newest edition of Virus Mania. In this review video, she discusses the book chapter by chapter.
(See also Sam’s video Why I’m Wrong where she addresses the assertions of critics of the book.)
Also stay tuned for a Virus Mania documentary

Fear of the Invisible, Janine Roberts

What Really Makes You Ill, by Dawn Lester and David Parker (see my review)

The Ultimate Conspiracy. The Biomedical Paradigm by James McCumiskey

Deadly Medicines and Organized Crime: How Big Phama Has Corrupted Healthcare by Peter C Gotzsche (4-page review)

Corona Investigative

Seeks to “educate about the lacking scientific evidence for the existence of viruses, history of virology, infectious disease theory, vaccination and especially the corona pandemic and all related topics.”

List of main articles:

https://telegra.ph/Corona-Investigative-09-26

Telegram Channel:

https://t.me.Corona-Investigative

Project Immanuel – with Stefan Lanka

Project Immanuel has been initiated by a small group of independent film makers to critically examine the scientific background of the “Corona Crisis”.

Project Immanuel main video

Important updates:

The “Virus Mutation” examines how the idea of mutations and of new variants arises from computer-synthesized genome MODELS (article)


US-American biolabs in Ukraine (article)

 

01: bioweapons – the myth of manmade pathogens (video) 

Follow Project Immanuel on Facebook or on Telegram:

https://www.facebook.com/watch/controlexperiment/

https://t.me/projekt_immanuel

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.