We are taught that life originated on Earth when the electricity caused by a primordial atmosphere “animated” the molecules present in the so-called “primordial soup”. The experiments carried out to support the theory, and considered successful… obviously did not lead to the creation of any form of life. This itself could make us reflect on the validity of the theory. But there’s more: these experiments are the result of a circular thinking, therefore not scientific. Having really no idea what the “primordial soup” or the atmosphere of the time was composed of (or whether it existed), the researchers formulated a theory based on the presence of the elements that would most easily determine the appearance of life. With this bias, they therefore reproduced similar conditions in the laboratory, barely producing some amino acids.
So, origin of life on Earth? Officially unknown.
Obviously, even the Greek and Roman civilizations, although the cultural and philosophical foundation of the West (therefore of the world), are said to have been populated by idiotic and immature individuals, capable of believing in abstract “divinities”. Therefore, if the Greeks developed the law of Pythagoras or the observation of the stars, they were wise and intelligent, while if they claimed that the forging technique had been transmitted to humanity by someone with superior knowledge, then they were once again stupid and naive. The fact that different cultures around the world said the same (with different names)? Irrelevant!
In the meantime, during the Middle Ages in the West, paranormal beliefs were established (yes!) in transcendental entities that were not demonstrable or even mentioned in the so-called “sacred texts” which in fact do not speak at all of heaven or hell, nor of the afterlife in general. These beliefs generated centuries of unprecedented violences, tortures, burnings and persecutions. But those beliefs, whose propagation has always occurred (and continues to occur) through violence and threats, are today considered an inalienable right. On the other hand, the heritage of previous knowledge in our common feeling is a series of myths, beliefs, fables, naivety and nonsenses.
As human civilizations evolved, all the same principles dictated in those ancient texts, even the ones accused of heresy and nonsense, were applied: starting from the fact that “noble” lineages maintained a continuous and persistent bond, interbreeding exclusively with each other and in general with blood relatives. In the same way, society was based on the principle of debt, just as indicated in ancient texts as a method of subjection of the masses.
And here we are at the French Revolution: people against nobles. The prototype of the so-called “populism”. And guess what? In just few years, they shifted from a king, under the monarchy, to… an emperor, under “democracy”.
Modern science also makes its appearance, apparently opposed to faith, although based on the same methods. Anyone who has studied science with an impartial eye can realize (I say “can” and not “must”, since the total conditioning in which we live is such that it is exceptional to even be able to think of questioning certain assumptions that are given to us as irrefutable and acquired facts) that the famous experimental method, as well as all the rules that accompany it, are valid only for “the poor” and for matters of little importance. But when it comes to universal theories, such as evolution or virology, suddenly everything becomes relative and approximate: the “experiments” are systematically adjusted, putting the most favorable conditions in place, discarding the less coherent results. with their own theses, choosing the most advantageous animal species, or, simply, lying.
Wallace and Darwin’s theory of the evolution of species is taught as Darwin’s theory. Why? Because Wallace, who was the authentic creator, had pulled back, realizing that man cannot be the result of a natural evolution, as there were, for example, no reasons to explain the loss of hair on human body.
The founding father of “vivisection” is Descartes, someone who used to nail dogs to wooden boards to literally open and dissect them while alive, and claimed that their heartbreaking cries were dictated by mechanisms similar to those of a clock, and did not correspond to real suffering.
The history made madmen, hypocrites and swindlers intellectual guides of humanity.
Contemporary pharmacology develops on these bases, starting from the assumption of being able to cure through the use of harmful substances: a madman’s dream becomes normality, and in the meantime the pseudoscience of virology was born. Who among us ignores the existence of viruses? Excellent tools for selling drugs, imposing controls, limiting freedom and instilling feelings of guilt: the masterpiece of the Freemason… er, of contemporary medicine. It’s a shame, however, that no one has ever isolated any virus, or been able to photograph it, or demonstrate its existence. Something that makes us feel bad when we get close to someone who is ill is there, there must be, of course… but what about viruses? These miraculous and imaginative micro-entities capable of penetrating healthy cells and forcing them to do their dirty work of replication have not only never been observed or demonstrated, but even thinking about them one could deduce how unlikely, if not impossible, they are: fragments of RNA, without organs of movement, sensors or manipulators, which, however, once in contact with other cells, would be capable (how?) of entering them.
And the great thing is that, although nowadays it can be defined as the most invasive science in our lives, virology does not respect even the most basic requirements of one of its founders, that is, Koch’s postulates (1. the presumed agent responsible for the disease in test must be present in all cases of that disease. 2. it must be possible to isolate the microorganism from the diseased host and grow it in pure culture 3. every time a pure culture of the microorganism is inoculated into a healthy host (but susceptible to the disease), the disease reproduces, the microorganism must be able to be isolated again from the experimentally infected host). If you ask them, they tell you that the postulates are out of date, and that you cannot expect to apply them… not to mention in case of emergency. An emergency, obviously, declared on the basis of what is neither demonstrated nor demonstrable. Like “patient 0” of Wuhan, who in the end had a very banal pneumonia, and having not been able to find any virus, given that no viruses of any kind have ever been isolated or identified, after a bit of computer processing of fluids collected from his lungs, among the billions of possible and imaginable RNA sequences (artificially created by the software), they took one and called it SARS-COV-2, where obviously there wasn’t even a SARS-COV-1.
We could continue for days, citing official historical truths and demonstrating how they are totally falsified, unprovable, often clearly inconsistent and in any case devoid of the scientific rigor which, as we were saying, only belongs to ordinary mortals and not to the elites who have always controlled us.