“We Need a Covid Commission” – Bill Maher Says Fauci and Democrats Refuse to Admit They Got It Wrong

[MichaelKeller99]

Joe, sometimes you just need to move on.

Yes, there was a great deal we know now or learned since then that they didn’t know. They were starting to ask better questions and either didn’t believe the answers they got or didn’t understand what they were learning yet.

As they learned more, new fields of medicine were created.

This is not the same thing as saying they had no idea what was going on - their understanding was in its infancy. The difference between a kid thinking addition/subtraction is the culmination of mathematics and gradually learning about calculus, geometry, etc.

You do you however. I wish you’d just admit your initial categorization here wasn’t accurate.

He can’t help himself: “There was no field of "virology", until DNA was discovered, and viruses could be viewed by actual microscopy and electron microscopy.”

The identification of the causative agent of tobacco mosaic disease(TMV) as a novel pathogen by Martinus Beijerinck (1898) is now acknowledged as being the official beginning of the field of virology as a discipline distinct from bacteriology.

 

[Pinehawk]

Don't worry, I'm sure he'll admit he was wrong.

 

[sober_teacher]

Don't worry, I'm sure he'll admit he was wrong.

You don’t exactly have a great track record either.

I know I’m not perfect as well, I try to be aware of that.

Self-awareness is a good thing.

 

[Pinehawk]

You don’t exactly have a great track record either.

I know I’m not perfect as well, I try to be aware of that.

Self-awareness is a good thing.

When I'm wrong, I admit it. But, I generally offer my opinions, instead of throwing out incorrect facts and figures. And, then doubling down on it.

 

[sober_teacher]

When I'm wrong, I admit it. But, I generally offer my opinions, instead of throwing out incorrect facts and figures. And, then doubling down on it.

If you say so.

 

[Joes Place]

Joe, sometimes you just need to move on.

Sometimes you need to look at the context of what someone else was posting.

His post was about a "study" from the early 1900s where trying to infect people with a virus - which didn't work, and claim this somehow impacts how we understand viruses and masks, today. And it didn't work, because no one back then understood how different viruses and agents were transmitted.


No one even knew what a virus was back then, which is my key point, and that is 100% accurate. They only knew "something" caused people to be sick, whether that was a bacteria (The Black Death) or a virus (smallpox, etc). Citing "studies" that showed irregular effects from the early 1900s demonstrates nothing, compared to what we know and understand, today.

 

[Joes Place]

He can’t help himself: “There was no field of "virology", until DNA was discovered, and viruses could be viewed by actual microscopy and electron microscopy.”

The identification of the causative agent of tobacco mosaic disease(TMV) as a novel pathogen by Martinus Beijerinck (1898) is now acknowledged as being the official beginning of the field of virology as a discipline distinct from bacteriology.

That might be recognized TODAY as the beginning; it was NOT recognized AT THE TIME, because no one knew what a virus WAS.

 

[MichaelKeller99]

Sometimes you need to look at the context of what someone else was posting.

His post was about a "study" from the early 1900s where trying to infect people with a virus - which didn't work, and claim this somehow impacts how we understand viruses and masks, today. And it didn't work, because no one back then understood how different viruses and agents were transmitted.


No one even knew what a virus was back then, which is my key point, and that is 100% accurate. They only knew "something" caused people to be sick, whether that was a bacteria (The Black Death) or a virus (smallpox, etc). Citing "studies" that showed irregular effects from the early 1900s demonstrates nothing, compared to what we know and understand, today.

Refute it then.

Or just keep moving your goalposts.

I’ll take his credentials over your 🤡ish insults any day.

https://greatmountainpublishing.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Experiments-on-Flu-Spread-by-Rosenau.pdf

 

[Joes Place]

Refute it then.

Now, we proceeded rather cautiously at first by administering a pure culture of bacillus of influenza, Pfeiffer's bacillus, in a rather moderate amount, into the nostrils of a few of these volunteers.

Easy-peasy.

A virus is NOT a "bacteria", and would NOT survive in a Petri-dish like a bacteria would. Pfeiffer's bacillus was a BACTERIA isolated from people, NOT INFLUENZA.

Haemophilus influenzae (formerly known as the Pfeiffer’s bacillus or Bacillus influenzae) is a nonmotile, gram-negative, catalase-positive coccobacillus belonging to the gamma-proteobacteria with a size of approximately 0.3 µm that can be found as part of the normal microflora in the human upper respiratory tract, particularly in the oropharynx and nasopharynx

And precisely WHY they weren't able to infect anyone with it - folks with normal immune systems WERE NOT IMPACTED by a bacteria they ALREADY HAD in their nasal passages.

 

[Pinehawk]

Uh oh...Joe's got his box of crayons out again...

 

[MichaelKeller99]

🤣 Uh oh...Joe's got his box of crayons out again...

Not the red ones though. At least not yet. That’s when you know he’s super triggered

 

[MichaelKeller99]

“A virus is NOT a "bacteria", and would NOT survive in a Petri-dish like a bacteria would. Pfeiffer's bacillus was a BACTERIA isolated from people, NOT INFLUENZA.”

Are viruses alive? Can something ‘survive’ if it’s not alive?

 

[Joes Place]

Are viruses alive?

Yes

But they will NOT survive in a Petri dish, like a bacteria will. In the study you're citing to try and make your point about viral transmission, the investigators did not know or understand this, and they treated the viral samples like bacterial samples.

Why did they not know or understand this? Because they did not know WHAT a virus IS back then.

Which was why their experiment FAILED.

 

[MichaelKeller99]

Yes

But they will NOT survive in a Petri dish, like a bacteria will. In the study you're citing to try and make your point about viral transmission, the investigators did not know or understand this, and they treated the viral samples like bacterial samples.

Why did they not know or understand this? Because they did not know WHAT a virus IS back then.

Which was why their experiment FAILED.

“Are viruses alive?”

“Yes.”

Source? Because for every one you cite I can cite one that says viruses are NOT alive.

It seems that after 300 years the only science that’s actually settled is the nonsense bouncing around your skull.

 

[Joes Place]

“Are viruses alive?”

“Yes.”

Source? Because for every one you cite I can cite one that says viruses are NOT alive.

There certainly are different opinions on that point.

However, for every example used that claims viruses are not alive, you can identify a living parasite or other living organism which fully depends upon another organism to procreate, or survive. And viruses evolve just like organisms do.

 

[Joes Place]

“Are viruses alive?”

“Yes.”

Meanwhile, you won't come back and admit your "example" on viral infectiousness is full of holes here...

 

[MichaelKeller99]

New study out reveals science knows just as little about virology as they did a hundred years ago. They sure are good at marketing, though. 🤷‍♂️

From 1918: “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.”

From 2024: “We were quite surprised,” says Susan Jackson, a study clinician at Oxford and co-author of the latest study. “Moving forward, if you want a COVID challenge study, you’re going to have to find a dose that infects people.”

Scientists tried to give people COVID — and failed

Researchers deliberately infect participants with SARS-CoV-2 in ‘challenge’ trials — but high levels of immunity complicate efforts to test vaccines and treatments.

www.nature.com

Scientists tried to give people COVID — and failed​

Researchers deliberately infect participants with SARS-CoV-2 in ‘challenge’ trials — but high levels of immunity complicate efforts to test vaccines and treatments.

It turned out that Zimmer-Harwood, a PhD student at University of Oxford, UK, had nothing to worry about. Neither he nor any of the 35 other people who participated in the ‘challenge’ trial actually got COVID-19.

The study’s results, published on 1 May in Lancet Microbe1, raise questions about the usefulness of COVID-19 challenge trials for testing vaccines, drugs and other therapeutics. “If you can’t get people infected, then you can’t test those things.”

When nobody developed a sustained infection, the researchers increased the dose by more and more in subsequent groups of participants, until they reached a level 10,000 times the initial dose. A few volunteers developed short-lived infections, but these quickly vanished.

 

[Joes Place]

New study out reveals science knows just as little about virology as they did a hundred years ago.

Still reeling from that whopper you'd posted about bacterial infection, eh?

 

[Joes Place]

Scientists tried to give people COVID — and failed​

The first participants got the same tiny dose of the ‘ancestral’ SARS-CoV-2 strain as did those in the first trial.

Meaning, the vaccines have fully eradicated this strain from the planet, and everyone is now immune to it.

 

[Pinehawk]

You look like a crazy person when you format posts like that.

 

[Joes Place]

You look like a crazy person when you format posts like that.

It's because I think your buddy cannot read regular sized fonts.

Because it was within the article he'd posted and he didn't appear to recognize or understand it.

And, for you, it means the vaccines were fully effective against the ancestral strains, because no one can be re-infected with them, anymore. Implies they're nearly 100% effective against original Covid.

 

[MichaelKeller99]

Still reeling from that whopper you'd posted about bacterial infection, eh?

I never replied to your post because it was so idiotic I thought you might have had a stroke. Just trying to show some compassion.

1) If you had read the study I linked (which of course you didn’t) you would see the point about Pfeiffer’s bacillus playing a role in the practice of junk science: the medical experts were using bacteria-based vaccines to prevent a viral infection. (Even you’re smart enough to know that doesn’t make sense).

2) You took the first sentence of Rosenau’s study - where he disproves the ability to transfer a viral infection via Pfeiffer’s bacillus - then ignored 2 pages of experiments where he was unable to infect healthy subjects with influenza from sick patients.

3) Your other statement on people with ‘healthy’ immune systems not being infected by bacteria already found in their bodies is questionable. Your GI tract is full of E Coli yet we’re told E Coli will make us sick if ingested; that’s just one example.

Your shtick - the constant moving of goalposts - is tiresome. Maybe that’s why people don’t want to answer your inane ‘Gotchas!’

It seems we’ve been taught viroliegy all these years instead of science.

 

[Joes Place]

I never replied to your post because it was so idiotic I thought you might have had a stroke. Just trying to show some compassion.

1) If you had read the study I linked (which of course you didn’t) you would see the point about Pfeiffer’s bacillus playing a role in the practice of junk science

Seems like you're trying to backtrack now.

Before, it was "Hey, they cannot infect anyone with the flu".
Now it is "Well, they didn't really MEAN to infect anyone with the flu, even though that was what I'd posted"

 

[Joes Place]

Your GI tract is full of E Coli yet we’re told E Coli will make us sick if ingested; that’s just one example.

Uh....yeah....because the E Coli is getting introduced into an area that it doesn't normally exist....

Will you volunteer for a "study" where we remove your intestinal bacteria, and inject them directly into your bloodstream to see how well you fare???

 

[MichaelKeller99]

Seems like you're trying to backtrack now.

Before, it was "Hey, they cannot infect anyone with the flu".
Now it is "Well, they didn't really MEAN to infect anyone with the flu, even though that was what I'd posted"

I’m not backtracking at all. There were two full pages of a government scientist conducting tests, trying to infect healthy subjects with various fluids from patients with active influenza. They couldn’t do it.* Yet you pick out one sentence where they showed bacteria doesn’t cause viral infections. Congrats! You’re a regular Sherlock Holmes!! Oh, by the way, at this point they were still vaccinating soldiers with bacteria to prevent viral infections. The Pharma/Government partnership is just as dumb and greedy today as they were a hundred years ago 🤡 🤡 🤡

*Just like the Lancet study failed to do re: covid.

Uh....yeah....because the E Coli is getting introduced into an area that it doesn't normally exist....

Will you volunteer for a "study" where we remove your intestinal bacteria, and inject them directly into your bloodstream to see how well you fare???

Ooh. Scary germs.

I already volunteered to be a part of their 4 year, ongoing study. No mask. No vaccine. No social distancing. No covid. Just 4 straight winters of “sickness and death” 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

[Joes Place]

I’m not backtracking at all. There were two full pages of a government scientist conducting tests, trying to infect healthy subjects with various fluids from patients with active influenza. They couldn’t do it.

Yes; because they didn't know how viruses worked back then.
They tried "culturing" them, like bacteria (which they knew how to culture back then).

Why are you sticking to your idiotic talking point here?

The simple fact is that in the early 1900s, very little was understood about "viruses", and what they were was not even known (in fact, until DNA was discovered, it could not be known).

Back then, it was mostly "germ theory", which is why they ran poorly constructed studies.

You and your buddy just posted data showing the initial Covid vaccine worked like gangbusters, because they cannot infect ANYONE with the original strains, anymore, despite knowing EXACTLY how viral transmission works.

Nice SELF-PWN there...

 

[MichaelKeller99]

Yes; because they didn't know how viruses worked back then.
They tried "culturing" them, like bacteria (which they knew how to culture back then).

Why are you sticking to your idiotic talking point here?

The simple fact is that in the early 1900s, very little was understood about "viruses", and what they were was not even known (in fact, until DNA was discovered, it could not be known).

Back then, it was mostly "germ theory", which is why they ran poorly constructed studies.

You and your buddy just posted data showing the initial Covid vaccine worked like gangbusters, because they cannot infect ANYONE with the original strains, anymore, despite knowing EXACTLY how viral transmission works.

Nice SELF-PWN there...

I’m sticking to my very intelligent talking point because you’re defending the absolute clowns who were promoting a vaccine with a bacterial antigen to prevent a viral infection.

A hundred years later and NOTHING has changed; Pharma whores using junk science to generate massive profits.

And now you’re trying to tell us that the original “…Covid vaccine worked like gangbusters…”? I thought you said they CANNOT generate sterilizing immunity, simpleton?

Such a tool.

 

[Joes Place]

I’m sticking to my very intelligent talking point

You're all over the map.

You attempted to post information that people couldn't be infected with influenza from the 1920s, due to their utter incompetence in understanding what a virus even was.

Now, you and your buddies just posted proof those original vaccines were extremely effective, because they cannot infect anyone with those original strains, anymore.

 

[MichaelKeller99]

You're all over the map. (This? Coming from you??? 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣)

You attempted to post information that people couldn't be infected with influenza from the 1920s, due to their utter incompetence (Whose utter incompetence? Oh yeah, I remember. It was the government and the drug companies who formulated and injected people with a vaccine against viral influenza….with a bacterial antigen! Again 🤣🤣🤣) in understanding what a virus even was.

Now, you and your buddies just posted proof those original vaccines were extremely effective, because they cannot infect anyone with those original strains, anymore.(This simply isn’t true because you have stated previously that the vaccines “…CANNOT generate sterilizing immunity…” Were you wrong? Did you lie? 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡 🤡)