(Editor: I am pleased to offer this space to my friend Tobin Owl. Technically, this is an op-ed, since Nevermore Media does not take a position on the existence or non-existence of viruses. At one point I tried to debate Margaret Anna Alice on this issue, and lost.

James L. Sutter on Twitter: "Have people been using Big Lebowski memes  against Donald Trump? If not, we should probably get on that. You're out of your  element, Donny. https://t.co/JfXDm0lneW" / Twitter

Why should anyone care what I have to say about microbiology, anyway? Personally, I believe that reality is an illusion, and that even our sense of who we are is a transitory fiction sustained within a morphing translinguistic fluid populated by trillions of beings in an infinitely intricate web of sentient energy. I believe that the furthest away one gets from this felt sense of one´s kinship with this universal force, the less certain anything becomes. This is the shamanic perspective – faith in the primacy of direct experience. Or, if you prefer, it is the awareness of one´s complicity with the creation of one´s reality, and the malleability of the energetic matrix within which one exists. Therefore, I consider everything mere rumour until confirmed with my own senses. Which leads me to my problem with virology. It´s unconfirmable by the senses. It´s incompatible with a shamanic perspective. It can´t be sniff-tested. It relies on trusting some expert claiming (or pretending) to have some kind of specialized knowledge inaccessible to ordinary people. In other words, it might well be bullshit. Worse, it usurps the role of the shaman.

I find it very hard to believe in something that can not be seen with the eyes, nor touched with the hands, nor smelt with the nose, nor heard with the ears, nor tasted with the tongue, nor known with the heart. It find it hilarious how atheists think people who believe in God are silly for believing in an invisible being whose existence can´t be empirically verified, yet they have no problem believing in viruses. Yeah, yeah, I get it that you think their existence has been proven by scientists, but how is that different from believing that God exists because a priest says so?

That said, I believe that contagious disease definitely exists, and that there must be some kind of physical mechanism through which infection occurs. That´s just common sense. But that´s as far as I´m willing to go.

I have not taken a side in this debate, and I haven´t been convinced by Dr. Lanka or Project Emmanuel, but I definitely consider Tobin´s perspective worth listening to. As always, if you think you know better, please feel free to tell us why we´re wrong in the comments!)

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is E3q0chDX0AEn20z-e1624485486860-1024x681.jpeg

by Tobin Owl

When startled, the bird will take off and fly around in ever-decreasing circles until it manages to
fly up its own backside, disappearing completely, which adds to its rarity.

— Crooked Mick of the Speewah: And Other Tall Tales

The priests of virology in their consecrated white garments or hazmat suits pace about the temples of a god called “Science” attending to laboratory flask libations and Petri dish offerings of organ tissues from the slaughter of innocent sacrificial animals… To which they add the sweet incense of industrial chemicals so loved by all the gods of the “post-mythological” pantheon—gods and demagogues of Medicine and Finance, Production and Politics, Security and State. Metculously, the priests and their researcher acolytes record their observations and feed their hungry analysing machines with data. But the question remains, who is this God they ostensibly slave for called “Science,” how did it originate, and are its virologist priests faithful to its spirit and precepts? Or do they, like so many religious leaders of past and present, simply mouth worn out phrases and extol their religion’s altruistic ideals with no intention of letting these obstruct the well-established rituals and creeds of their mystical cult, or weigh upon their consciences?

Ever since three years ago when the cult of Virology burst upon the scene as the protagonist and the dominant force shaping our society, our laws, our habits, our livelihoods, and our internal and interpersonal psychologies, an ever-growing number of physicians, healers, and insatiably and incorrigibly curious people like myself (and yes, even scientists!) have begun scrutinizing in great detail the practices and methodologies of the virologist priests, rekindling a highly censored movement that has been smoldering beneath the surface for decades. (See book gallery at the bottom of this post.)

Recently, I was surprised to discover a 67 page treatise by Mark Bailey, entitled A Farewell to Virology (Expert Edition), that has had over 230,000 views! And it was only published several months ago, in fall of 2022. (I suppose Bailey has reason enough to focus on this subject since the alleged and never-ending viral pandemic has turned his home of New Zealand into a extremist police state over the last three years.)

Bailey spent two decades in conventional medicine and holds too many degrees in science for me to decipher, and I should say I can’t particularly recommend A Farewell to Virology for people just beginning to look at how virology is done—Stefan Lanka‘s articles, or videos by Sam Bailey or Andrew Kaufman are much more accessible. But I feel that a couple of passages from his essay are worth quoting…

“It is hard to know exactly what to call virology, but it is not science. The current practitioners are engaging in some form of algorithmic or statistical speculation added to circular reasoning and confirmation bias, with a complete absence of what should be the corresponding process of refutation that lies at the heart of the scientific method. While the abandonment of the scientific method may be unnoticed or accidental by lower level participants, there are almost certainly conspiratorial motivations at higher levels of the global hierarchy…”

-A Farewell to Virology, p. 14

“It is hard to know exactly what to call virology, but it is not science.”

– Mark Bailey

Later, he states:

“The author has previously written in a postscript derived from A. F. Chalmers’ book What is this thing called Science?, that one of the pivotal issues with virology was that it invented itself as a field before establishing if viruses actually existed. It has been trying to justify itself since its inception:

‘In this instance, a virus particle was not observed first and subsequently viral theory and pathology developed. Scientists of the mid and late nineteenth century were preoccupied with the identification of imagined contagious pathogenic entities. The observations of the naïve inductionist did not identify a virus a priori, and then set about studying its properties and characteristics. The extant presupposition of the time was that a very small germ particle existed that may explain contagion. What came thereafter arose to fulfil the presuppositional premise.’

Because a scientific theory demands evidence that has repeatedly been tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, it is clear that ‘viruses’ never even reached the stage of a theory.

 According to the science, they remain mere speculation.”

– A Farewell to Virology, p. 19-20

One day last summer upon overhearing two friends discussing the latest rumors about ‘the virus,’ I stated bluntly, “Viruses have never been proven to exist.”

“Ha ha ha,” one of them chucked, perhaps supposing I didn’t know much about the subject. “Okay, but they sequence them, you know. They’ve even sequenced the entire human genome.”

“No they do not sequence ‘viruses,'” I corrected, “they sequence soup! The method they use to sequence the human genome is not the same as the way they sequence ‘viruses.’ They concoct a soup that they call a ‘virus’ and they ‘sequence’ that.”

“They concoct a soup that they call a ‘virus’ and they ‘sequence’ that.”

“That’s very strange,” he said in disbelief.

“Very strange indeed!” I replied.

I used the word ‘sequence’ in repeating my friend but in fact the word itself is misleading, just like so many other magical words when applied by the priests of virology. Because while with humans, animals, or bacteria care may be taken to ensure that they are dealing only with amino acids derived from a single organism – or at least one would hope so – no such care is taken in virology.

Virologists create a culture containing a myriad of proteins from diverse sources–monkey kidney tissue, bovine calf serum, unpurified human samples containing both human and bacterial RNA and DNA in various stages of decomposition. Then they siphon off the liquid that accumulates on top after several days (the supernatant). If we’re lucky they filter out bacteria and use density gradient centifugation to obtain a band of particles of a specific weight. Yet, where is the ‘virus’ in this process and how is its character determined? Analysing this soup or filtrate to detect tiny fragments of DNA or RNA, and chopping things up into even shorter bits, sophisticated computer programs then reassemble the codes into an imaginary sequence (a model) using in silico alignment set to conform to a pre-selected template.[2] And poof! There you have it—a viral genome! A completely fabricated heap of gibberish that has no parallel in nature.

And poof! There you have it—a viral genome! A completely fabricated heap of gibberish that has no parallel in nature.

Gee, I wonder why they say the SARS-CoV-2 genome looks like a bat coronavirus genome. Maybe, just maybe, they used a fictitious bat coronavirus template to model the “Novel Coronavirus” genome on. Could it be? Maybe they combined that with a ficticious SARS-CoV-1 template and even threw in a portion of the ficticious HIV template. Would that explain why some people have been claiming the SARS-CoV-2 gene sequence “provides irrefutable proof that the virus was manmade”?

Wow! I was right! (Ummm… minus the HIV part …?)

It’s right there on page 30 of A Farewell to Virology, complete with GenBank numbers for the fictitious bat virus and SARS-CoV-1 templates used by Fan Wu et al.[3], and more. Take a look for yourself! (And if you’re really curious about all the nonsense that goes on in the name of virology, read the next few pages.)

All Fan Wu et al. had was a 41-year-old man with pneumonia and a software-assembled model “genome” made from sequences of unestablished origin found in the
man’s lung washings. To make it appear legitimate they stated, “the viral genome organization of WHCV was determined by sequence alignment to two representative members of the genus Betacoronavirus: a coronavirus associated with humans (SARS-CoV Tor2, GenBank accession number AY274119) and a coronavirus associated with bats (bat SL-CoVZC45, GenBank accession number MG772933).” These alleged genomes are also simply in silico constructs that have never been proven to exist in their entirety in nature, let alone been shown to come from inside a virus.

-A Farewell to Virology, p. 30-31 (emphasis added)

Many adherents of “Science” will take exception to such scandalous characterization of one of their revered peer professions. To question the tenets and practices of modern virology is as anathema to them as questioning the divine inspiration of any of the tenets of the Church and its authoritative hierarchy to religious persons of Faith. To such persons, I offer my sincere apologies.

The truth often upsets long-cherished beliefs and perceptions; overturns our naive belief in the good graces of establishment and of authority. Science, in its purest form, did not arise as a method for erecting an edifice of dogma that could not be toppled, but to topple an edifice of dogma upheld by nothing more than habit and entrenchment.

Virology can only be said to be deception, generally unwitting by many its participants, yet surely by some intentional; skilled sleight of hand pushed forward by speculators of extreme global profits and agendas… The kind of obfuscation through obscure terminology characteristic of other specialties like Law that disempowers the common people with its high sounding claims and  jargon… An aberrant pseudoscience that blinds its most literate disciples.


[1] These include:

Sam and Mark Bailey of New Zealand (drsambailey.com).

The Perth Group of Australia, challenging the HIV/AIDS hypothesis since the early 1980s (theperthgroup.com; see also virusmyth.com).

Out of England, PhD, qualified nurse and health scientist Kevin Corbett; and Rethinking AIDS and Covid-19, an alliance of large group of world class scientists first formed in the 1980s. Even former Pfizer vice president Michael Yeadon has joined the group of those requesting legitimate control experiments be carried out concerning the alleged existence and pathoginicity of SARS-CoV-2.

From Germany, marine biologist and microbiologist Stefan Lanka; investigative journalists and authors of Virus Mania, Torsten Englebrecht and Claus Köhnlein; and Samuel Ekhart of the Isolate the Truth Fund.

From Italy, Stephan Scoglio, co-author of Virus Mania and the only person I’ve come across who has presented a serious challenge to spike protien rumors (i.e. apart from the Perth Group, who in their seminal work “HIV – A Virus Like No Other” (p.10 & c.) challenged the mainstream dogma that “retroviruses” including the alleged HIV are studded with spike or knob-like surface projections.) Correction, Mike Stone of ViroLIEgy.com has written an excellent piece on this, as well, complete with electron microscopy images.

Out of Canada, Christine Massey who has done excellent work collecting Freedom of Information requests (her own and those of others from around the world) revealing the non-existence of records pertaining to the actual isolation/purification of the alleged SARS-CoV-2, or any other viruses.

From the United States, Andrew Kaufman and Tom Cowan, both MDs, with the latter being the president of the Weston A. Price Foundation; Robert O. Young DSc, PhD; and two of my favorite authors, Jon Rappoport, author of “AIDS Inc.”; and Jim West, who has done much to revive the 1950s work of Ralph R. Scobey, M.D. and Morton S. Biskind, M.D. challenging the “polio virus” craze and documenting the poison cause of polio. West has also done fair work on respiratory disease (SARS, “Covid”, etc.).

And out of Spain, the Spanish publication Discovery D-Salud, whose board of directors consists of highly qualified professionals in the areas of medicine, biology, etc.

[2] This process, alignment, is part of Next Generation Sequencing and is accomplished through computer programs like Trinity or MegaHit.

[3] This represented the creation of the first Wuhan “virus genome” that would be used as the ancestor template for all alleged SARS-CoV-2 genomes to follow, including “variants”.

Related Materials


Select a book for more info/reviews.

The Ultimate Conspiracy. The Biomedical Paradigm, James McCumiskey

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

More books on the AIDS deception at VIRUS MYTH


Disease-causing Viruses Don’t Exist Says Biologist Lanka–Vindicated in Germany’s Highest Courts by Tobin Owl

PCR under Scrutiny, Pandemic Scandal taken to the Courts by Tobin Owl

Pandemics and the Abuse of Power: A Timeline 1853-2020 by Tobin Owl

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


An eye-opening 3 part documentary by Sam Bailey based on a 2021 paper by Dr Mark Bailey and Dr John Bevan-Smith titled, “The COVID-19 Fraud & War on Humanity” can be accessed here.

House of Numbers traces one filmmaker’s journey to discover the real meaning of AIDS