"The flies who are attracted to lies". If that's your idea of "sinister" I don't know what to tell you.
It was quite stunning to see so many professed "independent thinkers" gobble up Craig's implausible, contradictory and evidence-free claims, no questions asked.
Frances, it's well known that Mark and JBS wrote"COVID-19 Fraud and War on Humanity" together and that they are friends. I've seen zero evidence that either of them did anything remotely inappropriate or that any "plagiarism" was involved, and Craig's vague insinuation doesn't even make sense. He insinuated that someone plagiarized his work, while at the same time freely admitting that JBS wrote the statement of claim himself. He also claimed in the comments under his own article that the Baileys own him nothing and that he has no beef with them. He contradicts himself continually. I have no idea why anyone is taking him seriously.
JBS is certainly not accusing Mark of plagiarizing the statement of claim or anything else. Which leaves no room for plagiarism that I can see.
Craig does not have his own no-virus body of work that I know of for anyone to have possibly "plagiarized". If I've missed something, please show me.
Showcasing your Dupers Delight, revengeful grins and Flies On Shit infantile artwork alongside your failure to actually address the issues raised by The Poisoned Kiwi? Yes, I thought it was a 'wee gem' too.
Sam, whatever possessed you to make a video with such a hyperbolic loaded title?
''Narcissists who hate the Baileys' I don't know why you felt so compelled to make it
You've produced a good body of work cultivated a good image then you go jeopardise it all with this toxic counter productive rebuttal that turned into smears and baseless allegations
It makes no sense it comes across as egotistical and disingenuous just like your defence of your promoting of cholecalciferol
Look no ones perfect not even me I just think there's room for improvement in the way you go about things you have a large audience many of whom will be critiquing you video by video they won't all be blindly going along with every position you adopt, your real friends won't be privately agreeing with everything you do they will be saying hang on a minute Sam this is not smart
I don't hate you or Mark, I just think there's room for improvement in your responses to critique or even alleged misinformation about you and Mark
Everyone is still waiting for you to explain why you mentioned a bunch of Substack accounts—many of which that have shared your work—that have never wronged you in any way. It’s interesting how they are “no virus” people that are not part of a very certain *visible* clique.
Everyone should know that the people Dr. Sam likened to a pile of shit for no good reason in her “narcissists” video were pre-blocked by her so they couldn’t defend themselves. Be careful with narrative controllers. When people start figuring things out, they often deploy operatives who limit discussion and shift focus. The algorithms support them and crush others. When did the Baileys show up and why?
I don't believe your narcissists video is your finest work you used a loaded hyperbolic title and the content contained one or two baseless smears if you wish to protect your hard earned reputation then don't rush to make a sequel if its more of that, the only people who would revel in such fare are people like potty mouth McCairn, a simple rebuttal would've
sufficed, for when you sink to the level of those you complain about you become the same as them you lose the high ground and lose ground slinging mud.
Now I know you've had a unfair share of toxic abuse but you'd do well to rise above it but don't fall into the trap of thinking anyone with specific criticism of you or Mark hates you because that is not the case, for example I criticised you for promoting Vitamin D however I didn't do my self proud by the way I approached it, it was a late Saturday night I had had one too many and really should've waited till morning.
There's a right and wrong way to settle dynamics we could all learn to take a step back sometimes for when we justify things we shouldn't really justify just to save face it just makes for a more toxic environment.
I do disagree with the notion that Jamie's projects play into virologist's hands he is simply using their ways to disprove them he has picked up where EPE and Lanka left off and expanded upon it
I don't believe it undermines the work of the Baileys in fact it confirms the work of the Baileys, Lanka, EPE and team no virus
No, you seem to be misrepresenting the claims made by the Poisoned Kiwi. He did not claim to have "actually written" anything. His article clearly states, in the opening paragraphs:
"The questions being asked here are:
1. Did JBS steal from me and plagiarize my work by passing it off as his own to Sam and/or Mark Bailey? Did JBS commit fraud?
If 1. is true, should the Baileys, who acknowledge the importance of the information JBS provided to them and its significance in the creation of Mark’s own important book, issue a correction to statement(s) they have made, in order that the truth be faithfully recorded?"
I noticed that you overlooked the provision of a direct link to the material so that your readers can read it and make up their own minds. Here it is for clarity:
Lol here is Craig's title, on top of a pic of the Baileys:
"Honestly Sam and Mark Bailey? Heterodoxies and The Truth Behind 'A Farewell to Virology'
A story of lies, theft, and plagiarism."
And this: "While “the history of its [Mark Bailey’s book] development is known to only a few” it is clear the Baileys are not in that exclusive few ..." - lol, claiming the Baileys don't even know how Mark's own essay (not a "book") came about.
You embraced Craig's evidence-free smear article, no questions asked. Sam on the other hand came with evidence and easily refuted his bizarre suggestion that they weren't refuting germ 'theory' until after Mark bumped into him.
I hope everyone's take the time to read JBS's statement in response to Craig's evidence-free allegations:
Yeah, I read about 25% of the kiwi article, which took a while until I decided to scroll down to the bottom to see how long it was.
The intro that you quoted seems pretty clear, so I'm even more confused by Sam's response since it begins by alleging the disgruntled blogger of claiming to be the author of Mark's work, which, as far as I can tell, and as you have shown with the excerpt quoted, is actually not the claim being made.
It's possible Sam rushed into her response without the scrutiny she normally uses. Did she only read the very first sentence?
I know DPL can be pretty aggressive, but I just accepted that as being his unique character.
I was also completely unaware there were any disagreements between the Baileys and DPL / Jamie, and I need to investigate this, it seems to have something to do with controls being fallacious (?).
I'd really like to find out if Jamie's control experiments will be beneficial or not. They seem like a good thing, and I like the crowdsourcing/crowdfunded idea.
Not in the Poisoned Kiwi's Substack post either, by the look of it. So are you claiming insider knowledge prompted your mistaken wording? Insider knowledge that you cannot divulge here? Interesting.
Surely it would be fairer all around to admit that you waded into this situation with a mistaken impression of the actual issues?
Did you actually read the post before I provided it here?
Or did you assume that Sam Bailey's smearfest was justified?
As far as I can tell (and this is strictly my own observation, I could be wrong), the beef between the Baileys and Jamie Andrews seems to be on two main fronts.
Firstly, the use of the term ‘control experiments’ which requires an independent variable (IV) as the control factor.
As far as I can tell, the Baileys stance is that a causative ‘virus’ is the only valid IV for a valid viral control experiment. This requires said virus to have been isolated and purified for it to be added (or restricted) from experimental assays.
In other words, a virology experiment can only be ‘controlled’ if the IV is pure unadulterated virus.
As most of us know by now, isolation and purification of a virus has never been achieved for any virus, ever, in the long history of virology.
In practice, it is only necessary to demonstrate that the same results are obtained both with AND without a biological sample, regardless of whether or not that sample was purified. The sample itself is the IV to invalidate cell culture methodology (and sequencing, and antibody reactions).
This is the actual purpose of the ‘control experiments’ project: to invalidate the methodology itself.
I would like to hear the Baileys thoughts on whether or not Jamie’s project can expose and refute virology’s methodologies once and for all, without getting bogged down in entrenched and purist arguments about viral isolation.
Especially when the Baileys and Jamie already agree that this has never been achieved, nor will it ever be achieved, because the entire concept of viruses is fraudulent and false.
Secondly, the Baileys may have reached their own ‘discredit by association’ conclusions about comments and gossip in various ‘No Virus’ forums and chat groups, and the member relationships in those groups.
Like any other corner of the internet, ‘No Virus’ has subgroups and tribes comprising people of all backgrounds and character types. This includes a large segment of individuals let down badly by those they previously trusted. This creates a tendency towards suspicion of others, and lots of bad-mouthing.
The sort of things nobody would ever say directly to another in person, unless they wanted a punch in the mouth.
I’m certainly not excusing these behaviors, but it would be foolish to assume all of that petty backroom talk has malicious or nefarious intent. It’s just the nature of this scene, like it or not.
Let's start with: in what facility is this "control experiment" going to be conducted, and what are the technical and scientific qualifications of the investigators?
Jamie is better positioned to answer that than me, but as I understand it, he is using credentialed Contract Research Organisation (CRO) labs.
These are the same labs performing tests for anyone willing to pay for them, including the Pharma companies themselves.
Unless the labs somehow discover who they are dealing with, they would have no reason to treat Jamie’s submissions differently to those of their many other clients.
Right, so, as one who has done work like this, I have more questions. What is the funding source and the budget? Also, the lab is only going to generate one result.
This is an experiment designed to discredit a whole field of "scientific" investigation (the target here seems to be the cytopathic effect). So, where is the control study of the "control experiment"? To be valid, the entire experiment has to be run twice at independent labs unaware of one another's work.
Then: what are the negative and positive controls for the "viral" material? What is the provenance of the viral source, right to the patient and diagnostic method?
There should be a detailed proposal for the experiment laying all of this out. And while this is happening, I am trying to consider so little as the literacy level of the individuals involved. I have spent much of my career interviewing scientists and government officials. What I see in this discussion is an absurd amateur quality.
But why don't you get in touch with Jamie and have a friendly discussion and/or collaboration rather than insinuating that it's all wrong and incompetent ab ovo. You might think it pays towards your competence but it does not.
Sam Bailey's response was astonishing. She chose to use a psych diagnosis (highly unprofessional) and she flashed far too many Dupers Delight grins. She included me in her list of 'enemies' which is very odd indeed. Apparently merely liking the Poisoned Kiwi's post was enough to qualify as her enemy.
A willingness to consider the claims being made would have been far more dignified.
I imagine that she and Mark are under constant attack from many people and it must be difficult.
Sam needs to realize that she may have been responding to the legal action filed and strayed from the specific allegations made in the disgruntled kiwi article, which I also want to point out is more recent than the legal filing and could indicate that they wish to clarify their stance and allegations and perhaps plan on amending their legal action to match the allegations made in their article.
I think we can all agree that the forces we are up against would prefer nothing more than the fracturing of the novirus movement.
There are also narrative managers planted within dissident movements. Their work often gets more traction, hence creating support from people that don’t know there are scores of other people doing work and not gatekeeping. We’ll know if Sam is a good actor based on how she handles this going forward.
Further, Craig did not simply ask questions... so I guess you are misrepresenting his article.
An example of his incoherent insinuations/accusations:
"But now they must also live with the knowledge that the work that Mark may given time become world famous for, and justly so, was founded in lies, theft and plagiarism."
Eric, will you not finish off your doxxing of PM? No one wants to explain the death pop in March/April in NYC metro area, of which I was almost a statistic. I had the most intense gastro experience from March 29-April 4. I finally went to ER on the 4th after 5 days of emmitting liquids from both ends and incredible abdominal pain. Not one of the other 4 people I lived with had as much as a sniffle. ER gave me 10x intravenous dose of famotidine and swabbed me. I spent the most of the next 2 weeks in bed. As soon as I was up right, I began reading, "doing my own research", when I came across Dr Andrew Kaufman and the information he was sharing. It confirmed what I felt, this was not a contagious virus. As I am retired, but my wife wasn't, we made a calculated decision that I was more expendable, so I was the only person to leave our home during lockdown. I got sick, no one else did. Something made me very sick. Was it poison, was it 5G? There does not seem to be any urgency to uncover what caused this. It is important that the no virus information be spread as far as possible. Why the gaslighting over what actually caused the illness and death?
If we KNOW it was not a virus, that is great, but what the fuck was it, because if we don't discover it, we are still all in great danger from whatever mechanism created this situation.
I had health issues for months, first acute hyperthyroid issues for months, then it flipped to hypothyroidism for 2 months, then it all stopped without any medical intervention. I refused, based on the bs drs were spouting.
KNOWING there is NO VIRUS does nothing to prevent or defend against the next attack, no matter what the WHO calls it.
Doxx away Eric. If you refuse or fail to do it, it can only mean you actually do not have any docs and are just puffing yourself up behind a keyboard.
Focusing on what actually happened has really ruffled certain feathers. The 2nd Smartest guy was first to tell me to fuck off, then Sasha, and now it seems no virus people do not want to dig into the actual events, but rather focus on what it wasn't.
> now it seems no virus people do not want to dig into the actual events, but rather focus on what it wasn't.
‘No virus’ has always been focused on falsifying virology, i.e. what it is *not*. Chip away at the marble block, removing everything that is not David, until David—or Truth—reveals itself.
Establishing individual causes of ailments is a fool’s errand. Diseases are unique, subjective and cannot be transmitted from one person to another. Focusing on the ‘cause of disease’ invites endless speculation, false conclusions and ultimately wasted time and effort. That’s my own observation.
So everyone should take the shots because it’s just endless speculation that they cause disease. We shouldn’t define why major health events happen. Bad logic.
The visible “no virus” clique that the algorithms support don’t want to talk about why people died. They are gatekeeping (controlled opposition).
I see you. I am a New Yorker and I know there was a health event that happened in spring 2020 that this clique is intentionally avoiding. You do NOT need to calm down. Your points are valid.
Nobody has shown me a "major health event" in NYC spring 2020. At the VERY best there are conflicting reports, and at worst, we know of a iatrogenic genocide program and no evidence of contagion. To cast what you're talking about as ONE event, the same thing would have needed to happen to every person. Meanwhile, many witnesses saw empty hospitals, empty Javits, empty USNS Comfort.
So your claim is hollow and your accusation of me participating in a coverup is irrelevant. And I would love to know what agency hires a former masturbation workshop presenter, a horoscope columnist, and musician as an asset (unless these are all part of my deep cover). You make it seem like all I do is write about "covid." It is some of what I do, and my data is available to the world, unlike yours.
Madison Square Garden holds about 20,000 people at max. Imagine two and a half capacity crowds, in one town -- in caskets, in just 60 days. Tell me what became of all these bodies? Is there a corresponding rise in the purchase of caskets, graves and cremation services? Was there crazy activity at Hart Island, NYC's pauper graveyard?
I will say though, that this is an argument from incredulity. Just show me the bodies and I’ll be quiet.
I would think the funeral system in NYC has a physical limit not far away from normal, because $$$. No point in running a business far below capacity ‘just in case’.
So, where did all those bodies go? Did every funeral home in NYC run 24/7 for weeks on end? Were the morgues overflowing? I know the papers said as much, but is there any evidence it actually happened?
It’s August 2024 and the bodies haven’t materialised yet. If they all died, they had to be buried or cremated, or possibly just stored. Just show me that.
when people say, "Refrigerator trucks," I say, show me the truck, let's go inside, and if there is anyone in there, let's match the tag to the certificate of death. Speaking of, anyone who died in NYC has to have a DC with the NYC DOH. There are no bodies that don't have death certificates, including Jimmy Hoffa who was never found. So these people are shrieking and to go from the idea that I'm not obsessed with this issue to the accusation of being an operative is the product of people smoking bad weed or their innate paranoia.
Drama? Someone made a false claim of authorship (it does not matter the kind of authorship or the extent) vs Bailey's landmark article. It does not matter if someone claimed to have written one sentence or contributed one idea.
Thank you, the unmasking of the faux leaders/heroes must continue. I can't believe anyone would publish naked pictures of you - what was the point? It's childish and vindictive.
Cool it or I'm going to ban you. You are attempting to bait me. I do not dox people, and this is not about revealing their identity, address or banking information. Get a grip.
Humbly, I merely replied to Kiwi with the presumption that He did author what He said He authored, as I have had interactions with Him for a while and have no reason to think of Him as the sort to make things up. I said it was sad that He encountered such a scummy One, and hopes the Baileys would get with Him to clear the question up.
I also included My experience trying to find out why a comment I tried to make on Sam's Odysee channel was blocked, but that was really water under the bridge.
Next thing I know, I'm posted up on Sam's video as (I guess) a piece of shit. At least My (copyrighted) icon and name appeared with a picture of fly-covered feces. I wrote a response and posted it today:
Well, the video is linked in My article linked above, and an image in the article displays the shit image with a timestamp. but I will offer the link here and the timestamp:
The image fades in at about 16:50. There are two other points where a list, with Me at the top - maybe alphabetical order so that is why - shows up, but looking for the timestamps on those is not My most important priority, unless You request those as well.
Here is what you're talking about. Why are you complaining? You're in such good company...all the most respected presenters...I am envious I have not qualified to be in this exalted group of experts...and in Egyptian mythology, the Dung Beetle is the most sacred animal of all, because he carries the Sun to a new day.
I have no idea what You know and what You do not know, but I might ask a question... You might know, or You could ask Sam... Why did She deal with anything and everything She could find in that hit piece of Hers except who was the progenitor of the work JSB offered Mark and Her?
That was the core of the article by Kiwi. The motivator of the whole thing. Yet that single point is never addressed.
Anyway, I doubt I will be enlightened. By My estimation You have Your agenda and will stick to it.
Agreed. There was no call for approaching plagiarism claims with a hit piece (that didn't address the claims!), and then dragging Others into the mess. Very ungracious. I am quite disappointed in all of Them.
"The internet is a disembodied space. Almost everyone here is drifting around in electronic plasma, wondering where their brain went, and quite a few are in shock from the experience of not having a body. Anyone can present themselves as anything, or anyone, from anywhere — and some people will cheer along, making it seem real. Many are jealous of people who have managed to get something done despite all the distractions. Anyone can claim anyone else is anything else, and you don’t even need a deep fake to convince someone." OH BOY HOW TRUE IT IS.
I have been more active on Twitter since the Assassination Attempt. It is like a training tool as the feed presents me with a myriad of wild and crazy and also based and beautiful, and I have to use my skills to be sure I'm not being "socially engineered" or being spied on asking "if you haven't taken the covid shot, comment here so I can follow you"......ummm I don't think so.
But your famous enough to get the crazies misrepresenting who you are and why you do what you do. And, you have a nose for fraud, as you've demonstrated. I do take lessons from you.
Actually Eric, I will respectfully disconcur with you on the Baileys take down of their so called haters.
Firstly Im surprised Sam stooped to such a retort, it was a loaded hyperbolic title and the content therein was laced with baseless smears
It isn't narcissistic to disagree with the Baileys, why Sam felt so compelled to waste her time to make a video on this is really baffling, all she needed to do was say that Mr X is making these claims about us this is is evidence then say these are our counter claims folks make your own minds up
Wether everything Sam claimed in her video is 100% true is by the by, its the way she has gone about it that looks bad, if you are a true friend of the Baileys then you could be telling them that in private
Actually they should be above airing these things in public, dirty laundry never looks good, those slinging mud back end up with dirty hands too, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind but take it as read this was not the Baileys finest hour but it maybe a defining deed that undermines their
They consulted me. My position with them privately was suggesting they not make a public comment. They are under no real threat. There is no public relations crisis. Poison Kiwi is obviously ridiculous, as is Cock Magic, and nobody but trolls cares what they think. They made their decision. However, they are new to conducting themselves in this kind of public space, and it's very much a matter of learning through experience. Many people love them and you got to take the bitter with the sweet.
I kept as many names as possible out of our interview. Re Kiwi, there is no way to tell whether they made the right decision because we only live in this particular universe. Cock Magic had descended to being simply a troll. The way to handle people like him is to ban them and let them scream in their own little echosphere. It's not easy being in this kind of spotlight; people who are not on the stage don't really understand this. The Baileys are extremely private people and are not really suited to be public figures. I have considerably more experience than just about anyone in the "health freedom" space as a public figure on extremely contentious issues, as I've been in and out of the New York daily newspapers and the national/international press since 1990 or so.
Not sure I concur Eric, Mark seems less confident on camera than Sam but Sam's confidence carries them both
People are not impressed with the narcissists who hate the Bailey's video I can't believe they made it it doesn't make the Baileys look good it makes them look bad it comes across like a petulant overreaction on their part as they threw some low blows of their own making them no better than those they are complaining about
They should be open to critique and not resort to making divisive baseless smears people like dignity humility integrity people respect it when people put their hands up and admit I got that all wrong went about it the wrong way let myself down and Im going to strive to do better, people like and respect humility it is a effective way to diffuse dynamics
Wow. Now that I read the guy's post and Sam's video, just wow. Eric, do you know where the phrase "an orchestrated litany of lies" (in Dr JBS statement) comes from? It was the concluding line of Peter Mahon in the Commission of Inquiry into the 1979 crash of Air New Zealand Flight 901 into Mount Erebus. Apparently it "is one of the most well-known quotes in New Zealand". Fun fact.
Great job Eric. Sam's video take-down is priceless :)
That Flies On Shit artwork is infantile and yet sinister. I am presuming you find that 'priceless' too?
"The flies who are attracted to lies". If that's your idea of "sinister" I don't know what to tell you.
It was quite stunning to see so many professed "independent thinkers" gobble up Craig's implausible, contradictory and evidence-free claims, no questions asked.
Frances, it's well known that Mark and JBS wrote"COVID-19 Fraud and War on Humanity" together and that they are friends. I've seen zero evidence that either of them did anything remotely inappropriate or that any "plagiarism" was involved, and Craig's vague insinuation doesn't even make sense. He insinuated that someone plagiarized his work, while at the same time freely admitting that JBS wrote the statement of claim himself. He also claimed in the comments under his own article that the Baileys own him nothing and that he has no beef with them. He contradicts himself continually. I have no idea why anyone is taking him seriously.
JBS is certainly not accusing Mark of plagiarizing the statement of claim or anything else. Which leaves no room for plagiarism that I can see.
Craig does not have his own no-virus body of work that I know of for anyone to have possibly "plagiarized". If I've missed something, please show me.
The one where she mentions accounts that have done absolutely nothing to her. You sound like an op. Sad.
"Absolutely nothing"... but "like" an implausible, contradictory, vague and evidence-free accusation/insinuation, no questions asked!
Thank you for this substack post Eric. You are a wee gem 🥰
Showcasing your Dupers Delight, revengeful grins and Flies On Shit infantile artwork alongside your failure to actually address the issues raised by The Poisoned Kiwi? Yes, I thought it was a 'wee gem' too.
Sam, whatever possessed you to make a video with such a hyperbolic loaded title?
''Narcissists who hate the Baileys' I don't know why you felt so compelled to make it
You've produced a good body of work cultivated a good image then you go jeopardise it all with this toxic counter productive rebuttal that turned into smears and baseless allegations
It makes no sense it comes across as egotistical and disingenuous just like your defence of your promoting of cholecalciferol
Look no ones perfect not even me I just think there's room for improvement in the way you go about things you have a large audience many of whom will be critiquing you video by video they won't all be blindly going along with every position you adopt, your real friends won't be privately agreeing with everything you do they will be saying hang on a minute Sam this is not smart
I don't hate you or Mark, I just think there's room for improvement in your responses to critique or even alleged misinformation about you and Mark
Narrative managers is what I have concluded. They have them for 9/11, too.
Everyone is still waiting for you to explain why you mentioned a bunch of Substack accounts—many of which that have shared your work—that have never wronged you in any way. It’s interesting how they are “no virus” people that are not part of a very certain *visible* clique.
Everyone should know that the people Dr. Sam likened to a pile of shit for no good reason in her “narcissists” video were pre-blocked by her so they couldn’t defend themselves. Be careful with narrative controllers. When people start figuring things out, they often deploy operatives who limit discussion and shift focus. The algorithms support them and crush others. When did the Baileys show up and why?
I don't believe your narcissists video is your finest work you used a loaded hyperbolic title and the content contained one or two baseless smears if you wish to protect your hard earned reputation then don't rush to make a sequel if its more of that, the only people who would revel in such fare are people like potty mouth McCairn, a simple rebuttal would've
sufficed, for when you sink to the level of those you complain about you become the same as them you lose the high ground and lose ground slinging mud.
Now I know you've had a unfair share of toxic abuse but you'd do well to rise above it but don't fall into the trap of thinking anyone with specific criticism of you or Mark hates you because that is not the case, for example I criticised you for promoting Vitamin D however I didn't do my self proud by the way I approached it, it was a late Saturday night I had had one too many and really should've waited till morning.
There's a right and wrong way to settle dynamics we could all learn to take a step back sometimes for when we justify things we shouldn't really justify just to save face it just makes for a more toxic environment.
I do disagree with the notion that Jamie's projects play into virologist's hands he is simply using their ways to disprove them he has picked up where EPE and Lanka left off and expanded upon it
I don't believe it undermines the work of the Baileys in fact it confirms the work of the Baileys, Lanka, EPE and team no virus
Proton does seem whack, great article
No, you seem to be misrepresenting the claims made by the Poisoned Kiwi. He did not claim to have "actually written" anything. His article clearly states, in the opening paragraphs:
"The questions being asked here are:
1. Did JBS steal from me and plagiarize my work by passing it off as his own to Sam and/or Mark Bailey? Did JBS commit fraud?
If 1. is true, should the Baileys, who acknowledge the importance of the information JBS provided to them and its significance in the creation of Mark’s own important book, issue a correction to statement(s) they have made, in order that the truth be faithfully recorded?"
I noticed that you overlooked the provision of a direct link to the material so that your readers can read it and make up their own minds. Here it is for clarity:
https://craighutchinson.substack.com/p/honestly-sam-and-mark-bailey-heterodoxies
No need to thank me, you are very welcome.
You are correct, no need to thank you.
Lol here is Craig's title, on top of a pic of the Baileys:
"Honestly Sam and Mark Bailey? Heterodoxies and The Truth Behind 'A Farewell to Virology'
A story of lies, theft, and plagiarism."
And this: "While “the history of its [Mark Bailey’s book] development is known to only a few” it is clear the Baileys are not in that exclusive few ..." - lol, claiming the Baileys don't even know how Mark's own essay (not a "book") came about.
You embraced Craig's evidence-free smear article, no questions asked. Sam on the other hand came with evidence and easily refuted his bizarre suggestion that they weren't refuting germ 'theory' until after Mark bumped into him.
I hope everyone's take the time to read JBS's statement in response to Craig's evidence-free allegations:
https://drsambailey.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/Dr-John-Bevan-Smith-Statement-18th-August-2024-Complete.pdf
Odd that the crucial clause of that document is hand-written in blue ink and could have been added post-signatures.
That is why there are multiple copies. Here in the US, generally signers have to initial the written portion.
Same in UK and, therefore, in NZ too.
Yeah, I read about 25% of the kiwi article, which took a while until I decided to scroll down to the bottom to see how long it was.
The intro that you quoted seems pretty clear, so I'm even more confused by Sam's response since it begins by alleging the disgruntled blogger of claiming to be the author of Mark's work, which, as far as I can tell, and as you have shown with the excerpt quoted, is actually not the claim being made.
It's possible Sam rushed into her response without the scrutiny she normally uses. Did she only read the very first sentence?
I know DPL can be pretty aggressive, but I just accepted that as being his unique character.
I was also completely unaware there were any disagreements between the Baileys and DPL / Jamie, and I need to investigate this, it seems to have something to do with controls being fallacious (?).
I'd really like to find out if Jamie's control experiments will be beneficial or not. They seem like a good thing, and I like the crowdsourcing/crowdfunded idea.
.
Really? I am curious. Do tell us why you believe that.
because there is a lot about this that was not in the video.
Not in the Poisoned Kiwi's Substack post either, by the look of it. So are you claiming insider knowledge prompted your mistaken wording? Insider knowledge that you cannot divulge here? Interesting.
Surely it would be fairer all around to admit that you waded into this situation with a mistaken impression of the actual issues?
Did you actually read the post before I provided it here?
Or did you assume that Sam Bailey's smearfest was justified?
I know everything about everyone.
As far as I can tell (and this is strictly my own observation, I could be wrong), the beef between the Baileys and Jamie Andrews seems to be on two main fronts.
Firstly, the use of the term ‘control experiments’ which requires an independent variable (IV) as the control factor.
As far as I can tell, the Baileys stance is that a causative ‘virus’ is the only valid IV for a valid viral control experiment. This requires said virus to have been isolated and purified for it to be added (or restricted) from experimental assays.
In other words, a virology experiment can only be ‘controlled’ if the IV is pure unadulterated virus.
As most of us know by now, isolation and purification of a virus has never been achieved for any virus, ever, in the long history of virology.
In practice, it is only necessary to demonstrate that the same results are obtained both with AND without a biological sample, regardless of whether or not that sample was purified. The sample itself is the IV to invalidate cell culture methodology (and sequencing, and antibody reactions).
This is the actual purpose of the ‘control experiments’ project: to invalidate the methodology itself.
I would like to hear the Baileys thoughts on whether or not Jamie’s project can expose and refute virology’s methodologies once and for all, without getting bogged down in entrenched and purist arguments about viral isolation.
Especially when the Baileys and Jamie already agree that this has never been achieved, nor will it ever be achieved, because the entire concept of viruses is fraudulent and false.
Secondly, the Baileys may have reached their own ‘discredit by association’ conclusions about comments and gossip in various ‘No Virus’ forums and chat groups, and the member relationships in those groups.
Like any other corner of the internet, ‘No Virus’ has subgroups and tribes comprising people of all backgrounds and character types. This includes a large segment of individuals let down badly by those they previously trusted. This creates a tendency towards suspicion of others, and lots of bad-mouthing.
The sort of things nobody would ever say directly to another in person, unless they wanted a punch in the mouth.
I’m certainly not excusing these behaviors, but it would be foolish to assume all of that petty backroom talk has malicious or nefarious intent. It’s just the nature of this scene, like it or not.
Let's start with: in what facility is this "control experiment" going to be conducted, and what are the technical and scientific qualifications of the investigators?
Jamie is better positioned to answer that than me, but as I understand it, he is using credentialed Contract Research Organisation (CRO) labs.
These are the same labs performing tests for anyone willing to pay for them, including the Pharma companies themselves.
Unless the labs somehow discover who they are dealing with, they would have no reason to treat Jamie’s submissions differently to those of their many other clients.
Right, so, as one who has done work like this, I have more questions. What is the funding source and the budget? Also, the lab is only going to generate one result.
This is an experiment designed to discredit a whole field of "scientific" investigation (the target here seems to be the cytopathic effect). So, where is the control study of the "control experiment"? To be valid, the entire experiment has to be run twice at independent labs unaware of one another's work.
Then: what are the negative and positive controls for the "viral" material? What is the provenance of the viral source, right to the patient and diagnostic method?
There should be a detailed proposal for the experiment laying all of this out. And while this is happening, I am trying to consider so little as the literacy level of the individuals involved. I have spent much of my career interviewing scientists and government officials. What I see in this discussion is an absurd amateur quality.
Funding is crowdsourced, initially from a relatively small private group of familiar faces in the No Virus scene.
Now it’s publicly crowd sourced. I don’t have access to the accounting but I have seen invoices for the costs — it’s certainly not cheap.
Are you in contact with Jamie or would you be interested in speaking with him about the project in more detail?
But why don't you get in touch with Jamie and have a friendly discussion and/or collaboration rather than insinuating that it's all wrong and incompetent ab ovo. You might think it pays towards your competence but it does not.
edited
Credentialism in a field that operates under a false paradigm. Interesting.
Sam Bailey's response was astonishing. She chose to use a psych diagnosis (highly unprofessional) and she flashed far too many Dupers Delight grins. She included me in her list of 'enemies' which is very odd indeed. Apparently merely liking the Poisoned Kiwi's post was enough to qualify as her enemy.
A willingness to consider the claims being made would have been far more dignified.
I imagine that she and Mark are under constant attack from many people and it must be difficult.
Sam needs to realize that she may have been responding to the legal action filed and strayed from the specific allegations made in the disgruntled kiwi article, which I also want to point out is more recent than the legal filing and could indicate that they wish to clarify their stance and allegations and perhaps plan on amending their legal action to match the allegations made in their article.
I think we can all agree that the forces we are up against would prefer nothing more than the fracturing of the novirus movement.
There are also narrative managers planted within dissident movements. Their work often gets more traction, hence creating support from people that don’t know there are scores of other people doing work and not gatekeeping. We’ll know if Sam is a good actor based on how she handles this going forward.
Bingo.
Further, Craig did not simply ask questions... so I guess you are misrepresenting his article.
An example of his incoherent insinuations/accusations:
"But now they must also live with the knowledge that the work that Mark may given time become world famous for, and justly so, was founded in lies, theft and plagiarism."
I did not misrepresent anything. I provided evidence in good faith. I am not at all surprised to see you here with barbs flying as usual.
She only supports the visible “no virus” clique and calls troll accounts that spam ad hominem attacks “those who disagree.”
Eric, will you not finish off your doxxing of PM? No one wants to explain the death pop in March/April in NYC metro area, of which I was almost a statistic. I had the most intense gastro experience from March 29-April 4. I finally went to ER on the 4th after 5 days of emmitting liquids from both ends and incredible abdominal pain. Not one of the other 4 people I lived with had as much as a sniffle. ER gave me 10x intravenous dose of famotidine and swabbed me. I spent the most of the next 2 weeks in bed. As soon as I was up right, I began reading, "doing my own research", when I came across Dr Andrew Kaufman and the information he was sharing. It confirmed what I felt, this was not a contagious virus. As I am retired, but my wife wasn't, we made a calculated decision that I was more expendable, so I was the only person to leave our home during lockdown. I got sick, no one else did. Something made me very sick. Was it poison, was it 5G? There does not seem to be any urgency to uncover what caused this. It is important that the no virus information be spread as far as possible. Why the gaslighting over what actually caused the illness and death?
If we KNOW it was not a virus, that is great, but what the fuck was it, because if we don't discover it, we are still all in great danger from whatever mechanism created this situation.
I had health issues for months, first acute hyperthyroid issues for months, then it flipped to hypothyroidism for 2 months, then it all stopped without any medical intervention. I refused, based on the bs drs were spouting.
KNOWING there is NO VIRUS does nothing to prevent or defend against the next attack, no matter what the WHO calls it.
Doxx away Eric. If you refuse or fail to do it, it can only mean you actually do not have any docs and are just puffing yourself up behind a keyboard.
Focusing on what actually happened has really ruffled certain feathers. The 2nd Smartest guy was first to tell me to fuck off, then Sasha, and now it seems no virus people do not want to dig into the actual events, but rather focus on what it wasn't.
Margaritaville, maybe calm down. You seem to be reacting to the full moon.
https://open.spotify.com/track/6EJ24umBSZ6sxmWm8AjHNe?si=J1TVaNWQQXqBdiSdrHVvGQ&context=spotify%3Asearch
> now it seems no virus people do not want to dig into the actual events, but rather focus on what it wasn't.
‘No virus’ has always been focused on falsifying virology, i.e. what it is *not*. Chip away at the marble block, removing everything that is not David, until David—or Truth—reveals itself.
Establishing individual causes of ailments is a fool’s errand. Diseases are unique, subjective and cannot be transmitted from one person to another. Focusing on the ‘cause of disease’ invites endless speculation, false conclusions and ultimately wasted time and effort. That’s my own observation.
Could not have said it better myself. Well done.
So everyone should take the shots because it’s just endless speculation that they cause disease. We shouldn’t define why major health events happen. Bad logic.
The visible “no virus” clique that the algorithms support don’t want to talk about why people died. They are gatekeeping (controlled opposition).
I see you. I am a New Yorker and I know there was a health event that happened in spring 2020 that this clique is intentionally avoiding. You do NOT need to calm down. Your points are valid.
I unfollowed Eric, Sasha and 2nd Smartest Guy a long time ago because they have made their intentions clear.
Omfg...he unfollwed me! Whatever shall I do?
Nobody has shown me a "major health event" in NYC spring 2020. At the VERY best there are conflicting reports, and at worst, we know of a iatrogenic genocide program and no evidence of contagion. To cast what you're talking about as ONE event, the same thing would have needed to happen to every person. Meanwhile, many witnesses saw empty hospitals, empty Javits, empty USNS Comfort.
So your claim is hollow and your accusation of me participating in a coverup is irrelevant. And I would love to know what agency hires a former masturbation workshop presenter, a horoscope columnist, and musician as an asset (unless these are all part of my deep cover). You make it seem like all I do is write about "covid." It is some of what I do, and my data is available to the world, unlike yours.
https://chironreturn.org/chronology/
Have you looked at NYC’s own mortality stats?
These ones: https://www.health.ny.gov/statistics/vital_statistics/vs_reports_tables_list.htm
I did today. They don’t line up with the ones being publicized by Virginia ‘Ginny’ Stoner. At all.
Look at June 2020 on any of the NYC data sheets, or the annual summary report. There are no “50,000 excess deaths over 8 weeks” to be found on them.
(The most I could find in NYC official data was 28,000 over two years, specifically all of 2020-21)
That means either;
1. NYC is cooking the mortality books, which is apparently an almost unthinkable scenario according to Stoner, or
2. There was no “50,000 excess deaths over 8 weeks” scenario according to the best data published by the state itself.
Who are we to believe?
Madison Square Garden holds about 20,000 people at max. Imagine two and a half capacity crowds, in one town -- in caskets, in just 60 days. Tell me what became of all these bodies? Is there a corresponding rise in the purchase of caskets, graves and cremation services? Was there crazy activity at Hart Island, NYC's pauper graveyard?
I agree, Eric. Show me the piles of bodies.
I will say though, that this is an argument from incredulity. Just show me the bodies and I’ll be quiet.
I would think the funeral system in NYC has a physical limit not far away from normal, because $$$. No point in running a business far below capacity ‘just in case’.
So, where did all those bodies go? Did every funeral home in NYC run 24/7 for weeks on end? Were the morgues overflowing? I know the papers said as much, but is there any evidence it actually happened?
It’s August 2024 and the bodies haven’t materialised yet. If they all died, they had to be buried or cremated, or possibly just stored. Just show me that.
when people say, "Refrigerator trucks," I say, show me the truck, let's go inside, and if there is anyone in there, let's match the tag to the certificate of death. Speaking of, anyone who died in NYC has to have a DC with the NYC DOH. There are no bodies that don't have death certificates, including Jimmy Hoffa who was never found. So these people are shrieking and to go from the idea that I'm not obsessed with this issue to the accusation of being an operative is the product of people smoking bad weed or their innate paranoia.
When the topic is death, it’s pretty reasonable to ask for the bodies as evidence.
I'm urging everyone involved in this drama to pause for a moment and take a step back because it seems like it's quickly getting a little out of hand.
We all must consider that forces exist that seek to hinder or fracture the novirus movement.
It's little misunderstandings that have potential to cause a lot of unnecessary damage.
We all have egos that need to be reigned in every now and then.
Drama? Someone made a false claim of authorship (it does not matter the kind of authorship or the extent) vs Bailey's landmark article. It does not matter if someone claimed to have written one sentence or contributed one idea.
And your assistance is greatly appreciated.
Yes, legal actions are serious and can be very harmful.
Also, people act irrationally when suffering from mental instabilities.
If we have a common goal, we must make efforts to put it above all else.
Thank you, the unmasking of the faux leaders/heroes must continue. I can't believe anyone would publish naked pictures of you - what was the point? It's childish and vindictive.
I have published plenty, but they are mine to post. And this was a matter of context.
The fact that he's a psychiatrist is just the cat's pajamas. It's like finding out the school bus driver is an alcoholic, or the lifeguard can't swim.
you would think a psychiatrist would understand the basics of consent...
Fact? Hearsay. Still waiting for Eric to doxx PM
Cool it or I'm going to ban you. You are attempting to bait me. I do not dox people, and this is not about revealing their identity, address or banking information. Get a grip.
It's not about little misunderstandings, there is quite a history leading up to Sam's video.
Notice how the visible “no virus” clique are all okay with Sam Bailey trashing smaller accounts that are only here for the truth. Ask yourself why.
Humbly, I merely replied to Kiwi with the presumption that He did author what He said He authored, as I have had interactions with Him for a while and have no reason to think of Him as the sort to make things up. I said it was sad that He encountered such a scummy One, and hopes the Baileys would get with Him to clear the question up.
I also included My experience trying to find out why a comment I tried to make on Sam's Odysee channel was blocked, but that was really water under the bridge.
Next thing I know, I'm posted up on Sam's video as (I guess) a piece of shit. At least My (copyrighted) icon and name appeared with a picture of fly-covered feces. I wrote a response and posted it today:
Narcissists Who Think People Hate Them (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/narcissists-who-think-people-hate
please send that video with the shit image, and tell me the time stamp where I can find it. Thank you.
Well, the video is linked in My article linked above, and an image in the article displays the shit image with a timestamp. but I will offer the link here and the timestamp:
https://odysee.com/@drsambailey:c/Narcissists-Who-Hate-The-Baileys:0
The image fades in at about 16:50. There are two other points where a list, with Me at the top - maybe alphabetical order so that is why - shows up, but looking for the timestamps on those is not My most important priority, unless You request those as well.
Here is what you're talking about. Why are you complaining? You're in such good company...all the most respected presenters...I am envious I have not qualified to be in this exalted group of experts...and in Egyptian mythology, the Dung Beetle is the most sacred animal of all, because he carries the Sun to a new day.
https://audio.pwfm.tech/documents/1800+web-flies-excrement.jpg
I am supposing You have not read My article... Thanks for... [shrug]
Do have a nice life.
You are welcome to tell me one thing that I don't know.
I have no idea what You know and what You do not know, but I might ask a question... You might know, or You could ask Sam... Why did She deal with anything and everything She could find in that hit piece of Hers except who was the progenitor of the work JSB offered Mark and Her?
That was the core of the article by Kiwi. The motivator of the whole thing. Yet that single point is never addressed.
Anyway, I doubt I will be enlightened. By My estimation You have Your agenda and will stick to it.
Love always! And again, have a lovely life.
We don’t work for gatekeepers. The whole clique is compromised. Their behavior exposes them.
Agreed. There was no call for approaching plagiarism claims with a hit piece (that didn't address the claims!), and then dragging Others into the mess. Very ungracious. I am quite disappointed in all of Them.
Oh please.
If you "know" PM is a 70 year old psychiatrist and paid shill, finish your doxxing attempt
Gaslight 101, as you were
https://open.substack.com/pub/jamestrue/p/rabies-is-a-fortune-cookie?r=jtyzz&utm_medium=ios
Thanks, a fascinating read indeed.
"The internet is a disembodied space. Almost everyone here is drifting around in electronic plasma, wondering where their brain went, and quite a few are in shock from the experience of not having a body. Anyone can present themselves as anything, or anyone, from anywhere — and some people will cheer along, making it seem real. Many are jealous of people who have managed to get something done despite all the distractions. Anyone can claim anyone else is anything else, and you don’t even need a deep fake to convince someone." OH BOY HOW TRUE IT IS.
I have been more active on Twitter since the Assassination Attempt. It is like a training tool as the feed presents me with a myriad of wild and crazy and also based and beautiful, and I have to use my skills to be sure I'm not being "socially engineered" or being spied on asking "if you haven't taken the covid shot, comment here so I can follow you"......ummm I don't think so.
But your famous enough to get the crazies misrepresenting who you are and why you do what you do. And, you have a nose for fraud, as you've demonstrated. I do take lessons from you.
That Ben Garrison cartoon is fantastic!
My dog, Oliver, sends his love.
Marlene
Please tell Oliver I love him right back and thank him for the kiss.
Actually Eric, I will respectfully disconcur with you on the Baileys take down of their so called haters.
Firstly Im surprised Sam stooped to such a retort, it was a loaded hyperbolic title and the content therein was laced with baseless smears
It isn't narcissistic to disagree with the Baileys, why Sam felt so compelled to waste her time to make a video on this is really baffling, all she needed to do was say that Mr X is making these claims about us this is is evidence then say these are our counter claims folks make your own minds up
Wether everything Sam claimed in her video is 100% true is by the by, its the way she has gone about it that looks bad, if you are a true friend of the Baileys then you could be telling them that in private
Actually they should be above airing these things in public, dirty laundry never looks good, those slinging mud back end up with dirty hands too, an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind but take it as read this was not the Baileys finest hour but it maybe a defining deed that undermines their
good work
They consulted me. My position with them privately was suggesting they not make a public comment. They are under no real threat. There is no public relations crisis. Poison Kiwi is obviously ridiculous, as is Cock Magic, and nobody but trolls cares what they think. They made their decision. However, they are new to conducting themselves in this kind of public space, and it's very much a matter of learning through experience. Many people love them and you got to take the bitter with the sweet.
I agree Eric, it seemed much ado about nothing the Baileys should be able to take it in their stride and rise above it
edited
I kept as many names as possible out of our interview. Re Kiwi, there is no way to tell whether they made the right decision because we only live in this particular universe. Cock Magic had descended to being simply a troll. The way to handle people like him is to ban them and let them scream in their own little echosphere. It's not easy being in this kind of spotlight; people who are not on the stage don't really understand this. The Baileys are extremely private people and are not really suited to be public figures. I have considerably more experience than just about anyone in the "health freedom" space as a public figure on extremely contentious issues, as I've been in and out of the New York daily newspapers and the national/international press since 1990 or so.
https://planetwaves.net/press-room-eric-francis-coppolino/
Not sure I concur Eric, Mark seems less confident on camera than Sam but Sam's confidence carries them both
People are not impressed with the narcissists who hate the Bailey's video I can't believe they made it it doesn't make the Baileys look good it makes them look bad it comes across like a petulant overreaction on their part as they threw some low blows of their own making them no better than those they are complaining about
They should be open to critique and not resort to making divisive baseless smears people like dignity humility integrity people respect it when people put their hands up and admit I got that all wrong went about it the wrong way let myself down and Im going to strive to do better, people like and respect humility it is a effective way to diffuse dynamics
Sam had TV experience -- in New Zealand.
I would only add one last thing, Kiwi and PM were not critique. Anyway I must leave it here.
No probs Eric
Wow. Now that I read the guy's post and Sam's video, just wow. Eric, do you know where the phrase "an orchestrated litany of lies" (in Dr JBS statement) comes from? It was the concluding line of Peter Mahon in the Commission of Inquiry into the 1979 crash of Air New Zealand Flight 901 into Mount Erebus. Apparently it "is one of the most well-known quotes in New Zealand". Fun fact.
link - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Mahon_(judge)
In any case, as an old friend used to say, "if you can't convince them, confuse them". And boy, do they have an army to do that.
Even if this is not an Agency operation from its inception, they must be high-fiving and bookmarking these documents/comments for future reference.
For some strange reason, i was never informed of this piece. Oh well. It is ...quite good. Thanks, will share. Too bad about the nut jobs infestation.
https://open.substack.com/pub/mslyravega/p/a-tad-bit-of-new-music?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=1mv6o4