Virology’s Event Horizon – Executive Summary of a Must-Read Essay

Many of you have read a Farewell To Virology by Dr. Mark Bailey and watched many of Dr. Sam Bailey’s videos.

Mark created Farewell for experts in science and medical researchers. It’s impact has been tremendous; it’s been downloaded over 250,000 times, uploaded to many other websites, translated into several languages and shared with others countless times.

Mark’s latest is a short 7 page essay that zeros in on the fatal flaws in virology.

For your convenience, I’ve created the below Executive Summary, with my comments and emphasis interspersed. I hope you find it valuable as an introduction and study guide.

I encourage everyone to read and share Mark’s full essay, (HERE).

Virology’s Event Horizon – Executive Summary

1. VIRUSES WERE IMAGINED INTO EXISTENCE.

From Mark,

“It remains largely unappreciated that viruses were not discovered and then studied – they were imagined.

“Virology went on to invent itself on the basis of these hypothetical particles:

“… One of the pivotal issues in virology was that it invented itself as a field before establishing if viruses actually existed. It has been trying to justify itself since it’s inception.”

2. LOGICAL FALLACY #1: REIFICATION – THE EMPEROR’S NOT WEARING ANY CLOTHES!

The reification fallacy is “the error of treating something that is not concrete, such as an idea, as a concrete thing.”

Great examples are ‘The Emperor’s New Clothes’ and an imaginary unicorn. Both are made up, not-real, mythical ideas and not concrete, real things.

Dr. Mark states: this is virology’s “Original Sin.”

3. NO INDEPENDENT VARIABLE HAS EVER BEEN USED TO PROVE VIRUSES EXIST AND CAUSE DISEASE.

Science experiments first require a hypothesis that A causes B.

To conduct the experiment Science must eliminate ALL other potential variables (C,D,E through Z) in order to find the one, unique thing, “A”, that causes an effect, “B”.

This single, distinct, independent thing, “A” is called the Independent Variable.

The independent variable is the isolated focal point that’s assumed, but not proven, to cause a unique, specific effect – which is called the dependent variable, “B”.

From Mark:

“…the scientific method [has] the requirement to generate a hypothesis (that is necessarily falsifiable) and then to test it with experiments.

“The independent variable is the postulated cause of this observation or effect.

“The experiments must possess a dependent variable – the part that is an observation or effect – that depends on an independent variable [to be its cause].”

MM Comment: This has never been done regarding viruses – Ever.

4. EXPERIMENTS REQUIRE A ‘CONTROL’.

Related to viruses Mark explains,

“Two specimens are used, one that is [supposed to be] infected with the virus vector of interest, the other is treated the same way except with out the virus.”

This is to show that the independent variable is the most likely cause of the observed effect.

From Mark:

“Experiments also require a ‘control’, namely the ability to compare variables and conditions in a manner that makes it possible to observe the results when varying *one* factor at a time.”

Mark then states,

“And herein lies the complete downfall of virology and the virus model itself.

“An experiment that follows the scientific method and purports to show the existence of a virus needs to have a valid control to establish that the observed effects are the result of the virus (the claimed independent variable) and not other factors.”

5. LOGICAL FALLACY #2: BEGGING THE QUESTION

This logical fallacy is also referred to as Petitio Principii. It purports to prove a proposition while simultaneously taking the proposition for granted.

Think: Cart Before the Horse.

From Mark,

“The only experiments they can possibly perform must fall back on the prior assertion that viral particles are present in one group and not present in the ‘mock-infected’ group. …this is a logical fallacy.”

Here’s a key point from Mark:

“… The reason the virologists have “neglected” to perform valid cell culture control experiments is because that by definition they are not able to do so.”

Then Mark delivers the sword through the heart of virology:

“Cytopathic Effects (CPEs are the death of cells) are claimed to indicate the presence of viruses but they can only be said to be the observation of cells breaking down in a test well.”

“The CPEs are the dependent variable in the experiment but it is patently clear that no independent variable (a virus) can be discerned in this process.

6. IN SUMMARY

Mark provides these three points in summary:

“a) The particles being declared as viral are seen for the first time as part of the CPE observations, i.e. they are dependent variables. It is preposterous to claim that they are also the independent variable in the same experiment.

“b) The in vitro (laboratory) observations cannot be known to represent any in vivo (within living) process (It is beyond what the virologists’ cell culture technique can determine).

“c) The techniques involved in electron microscopy introduced further variables that are not controlled in addition to technical artifact and the further limitation that they are static structures embedded in resin, not living tissue.”

“The attempts to support the virus model through scientific methods have clearly failed and the imagined viruses have no known existence outside of logical fallacies and pseudo scientific claims.”

MM FINAL COMMENTS:

I urge everyone to read this paper thoroughly and especially to read through all of the references and notes. In particular I would suggest you pay close attention to the following notes: 15, 17, 18 and especially 20.

This essay, if widely shared, will greatly contribute to the end of the public’s blind belief in the virus and contagion myths – and thus can eliminate the root cause of the tyrannical oppression we all have recently suffered.

Please share widely.

Share

9:49 pm on April 17, 2024