Coffee without the cream

Last weekend there was a video presentation by Drs. Kaufman and Cowen, which can be located here. It is very long, and the technology they use, called Webinarjam, is clunky. Even though it is now in replay mode, you cannot fast forward or go back. There is on the right hand side a comment thread, but they roll by so fast you cannot read them, nor can you stop them. Neither can you search the comments for keywords. I think the creators of the software deserve a hat tip nonetheless, so here is to you Mrs. Olsen’s fourth grade class.

There is at a point far into the video (it cannot be time stamped) a Q&A, and very shortly into that session a Dr. Wilson called and did quite a monologue on how Kaufman and Cowen are misrepresenting the virus isolation process. Kaufman asked him if he had a paper on the matter, and yes, said Wilson, he had linked to it twice in the comments. Good luck on finding those links using Webinarjam. In the end, Wilson promised to send the paper to both Kaufman and Cowen, who would read and report back.

I had a problem with that. There are leaders and there is controlled opposition, and we can never be sure of anyone’s true status. As much as I have learned from K and C, I want to keep them at arm’s length. Therefore I realized that I needed to get a hold of that paper and read and judge it for myself. Oregon Matt found it, and I found the link to a printable version here.

It is short, but has in it very dense wording and lots of inside baseball talk. I suppose that is OK if it is a scientific paper, as scientists talk to other scientists like that, all of them being familiar with the terminology. But for me, the non-scientist, it leaves me out of the loop. Consequently, as I knew that Steve, Matt and Stephers would be reading the paper as well, I volunteered to take all of the jargon contained therein and find working definitions. I include my work at the very end of this blog post for any of you who want to immerse yourself. You will find definitions the the same sequence as they appear in the paper itself.

But something bothered me right at the outset. The paper, called In situ structural analysis of SARS-CoV-2 spike reveals flexibility mediated by three hinges, describes work done on the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Where did it come from? Kaufman asked Wilson about that, did it come from a patient? No, said Wilson, it was generated elsewhere in other isolations, as with each iteration of an isolation of a virus, all of the toxins used in the initial isolation are shed, and in the end, you wind up with a pure virus.

That’s nonsense. Even today, May 20, 2021, Jon Rappoport writes about The Pandemic Virus That Doesn’t Exist. If you’ve not reviewed the widely available literature on the process that virologists mislable “isolation,” JR’s article will give you the quick rundown.

So the paper in question, whose lead author is Beata Turonová, is about angels on the head of a pin. The authors do this for a living, and are so soaked in the fraud of their profession that they imagine they are doing real work. The object of the paper is probably to produce a vaccine, as when that happens, truckloads of money back up to your garage.

In an exchange I had with Oregon Matt, we each suggested that Turonová et al had nothing with which to work, and so ASSERTED the virus. It reminded me of a talk I once heard by a man named Fr. Stanley, who taught philosophy. The talk was lighthearted and funny, called something like Counting From One to Ten – Philosophically Speaking. I only remember the opening, as it has been decades. Stanley said that from a rational standpoint, there is no way to count to 10 unless you first go from 0 to 1. But that cannot be done. But there is a way around it, he said, and that is simply to ASSERT  that 1 exists.

This, he said, is called existentialism. And that is the nature of the paper in question, existentialist. (This reminds me of a joke: Jean-Paul Sartre was sitting in a coffee shop in Paris, and asked the waitress for coffee, without cream. A few minutes later, the waitress came back and said to him, “I am sorry, monsieur, but we are all out of cream. Would you instead like your coffee without milk?”

Below are my notes from the Turonová et al paper. I’m still waiting on Kaufman and Cowen, but don’t think I need any help from them. I think we handled this on our own, without consultation with experts.

Some of the terminology used, and definitions, as best I could do:

Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2, or ACE2 “receptor”: the protein provides the entry point for the coronavirus to hook into and infect a wide range of human cells. Note, entry into a cell by a virus has never been documented.

Virion: the complete, infective form of a virus outside a host cell, with a core of RNA or DNA and a capsid.

Glycosylation site: Glycans (carbohydrates, sugars, monosaccharides, oligosaccharides and polysaccharides) are widely distributed in nature, in all living life forms. Glycosylation is the reaction in which a carbohydrate, i.e. a glycosyl donor, is attached to a hydroxyl or other functional group of another molecule. In biology, glycosylation mainly refers in particular to the enzymatic process that attaches glycans to proteins, or other organic molecules, but actually this chemical reaction can also be non-enzymatic.

Tropism: the turning of all or part of an organism in a particular direction in response to an external stimulus.

S: The spike protein surface. 

Trimeric: A chemical compound or molecule consisting of three identical simpler molecules. 

Ectodomain: The domain of a membrane protein that extends into the extracellular space (the space outside a cell). Ectodomains are usually the parts of proteins that initiate contact with surfaces, which leads to signal transduction.

Receptor Binding Domain (RBD): The S protein mediates viral entry into host cells by first binding to a host receptor through the RBD.

N-terminal domains: In the molecule of a peptide, the amino acid residue on one end has an amine group on the alpha carbon. This amino acid residue is called the N-terminal of the peptide.

Epitope: the part of an antigen molecule to which an antibody attaches itself.

Supernatant: denoting the liquid lying above a solid residue after crystallization, precipitation, centrifugation, or other process.

Tomography: a technique for displaying a representation of a cross section through a human body or other solid object using X-rays or ultrasound.

Trimer: A macromolecular complex formed by three, usually non-covalently bound, macromolecules like proteins or nucleic acids.

Vero E6: Vero E6 cells show some contact inhibition, so are suitable for propagating viruses that replicate slowly.

Sanger sequencing: A method of DNA sequencing based on the selective incorporation of chain-terminating dideoxynucleotides by DNA polymerase during in vitro DNA replication. After first being developed by Frederick Sanger and colleagues in 1977, it became the most widely used sequencing method for approximately 40 years.

Asp614 > Gly (D614G) allele: refers to mutation at 614th position of the Spike protein (D614G) rapidly.

NovaSTA and STOPGAP: Might possibly refer to brand names.

Cryo-electron microscopy (Cryo-EM): A type of transmission electron microscopy that allows for the specimen of interest to be viewed at cryogenic temperatures, i.e., very cold.

11-residue Leu repeat sequence: “Sequence analyses of LRR proteins suggested the existence of several different subfamilies of LRRs. The significance of this classification is that repeats from different subfamilies never occur simultaneously and have most probably evolved independently. It is, however, now clear that all major classes of LRR have curved horseshoe structures with a parallel beta sheet on the concave side and mostly helical elements on the convex side. At least six families of LRR proteins, characterised by different lengths and consensus sequences of the repeats, have been identified. Eleven-residue segments of the LRRs (LxxLxLxxN/CxL), corresponding to the beta-strand and adjacent loop regions, are conserved in LRR proteins, whereas the remaining parts of the repeats (herein termed variable) may be very different.” (From paper: Leucine rich repeat,

Single particle electron Microscopy (EM): In a single-particle cryo-EM experiment, macromolecular assemblies are frozen in a thin layer of ice and imaged with an electron microscope. Thousands to millions of images of individual assemblies must be computationally aligned and merged to arrive at a three-dimensional structure.

Micelle(s): an aggregate of molecules in a colloidal solution, such as those formed by detergents.

Serine protease TMPRSS2: Having to do with prostate cancers.

Furin cleavage site: The furin cleavage site consists of four amino acids PRRA, which are encoded by 12 inserted nucleotides in the S gene.

39 thoughts on “Coffee without the cream

  1. Kaufman and Cowan, sounds like a law firm. Notice how they were there in the beginning of the hoax with long clunky videos. Never hears or seen them before. Like a few others, they became famous Covid celebrities.


    1. “Kaufman and Cowan, sounds like a law firm” So what?

      “Notice how they were there in the beginning of the hoax with long clunky videos” So what. Care to offer some useful analysis or pointed criticism or support re the material they’ve presented?

      “Never hears or seen them before” So what?

      “Like a few others, they became famous Covid celebrities” So what. Do you have any useful analysis to offer?…if nobody were to become “famous” for resisting or illuminating with research, etc., etc., then who could possibly help lead the way to better understanding?


    2. Greg – Just for the record, while I was not familiar with Dr. Andy Kaufman prior to this scam, I was very familiar with Dr. Tom Cowan. Not only do we share mutual friends and acquaintances, but in June 2018, I purchased his Human Heart, Cosmic Heart book, as I was researching strophanthus (which he featured in the book, and recently did a video highlighting its use, which may even have relevance to treating “COVID.”) to use personally, with friends, and in my private healing practice. In any event, Tom has been well known and very highly regarded in the holistic healing community, as he has been active with the Weston A. Price Foundation and the anthroposophical medicine/Waldorf school community for many years (in which I have been engaged as well). He is a beacon of trust and truth in the non-allopathic sector. Some of his videos may be considered long or clunky; but, if anything, I feel that only serves to confirm his integrity, as he does not have “handlers” to coach him on presenting polished jargon and non-truths.


      1. How can one trust someone who believes in elves and gnomes, as Waldorf Skool teaches?

        I’m not trying to be contentious …simply asking.

        Are elves and gnomes the naturalpath’s equivalent of “viruses”?


        1. Next scientific paper you come across describing Covid-19, just place a red line through each mention of “virus” and replace with word “gnome”.


        2. RRR,
          1828 Webster’s
          GNOME, noun nome. An imaginary being, supposed by the cabalists, to inhabit the inner parts of the earth, and to be the guardian of mines, quarries. etc.

          Not literal! Not of “matter.” Symbol, legend, myth, psychic entity, it doesn’t matter so much what it’s called/named, but that because it is imagined, or created by the minds of man, is an important part of human thought (consciousness).

          “…imaginary being…”

          What do you have against imaginary beings? Everything is not material, linear, or “provable.” Right? Imagine the possibilities, rather than the “impossibilities.” Why not try to imagine a universe that is interconnected and fluid made of material and energies that cannot be understood or analyzed by the five senses? What is the harm in opening one’s mind to alternatives to the consensus (conformist) beliefs that have gotten us into this mess we’re in? You seem like a smart guy, but appear to be blind to ideas that don’t fit your beliefs. The universe needs your help/participation if we are ever going to evolve to a higher human consciousness — our escape route, IMO. Join the party, there’s little to lose and much to gain.

          This is not intended as criticism, or a personal slight, but an invitation to try something different for the hell of it. The universe needs your positive energy too.


          1. Sit a young 3 yr old down and read him/her the spiel you just gave.

            Fill kids head w nonsense and then proceed to tell him/her it’s “literal”.

            OK !! I’m down with that. 🙂


            1. Out here in Utah we have the Urim and Thurim…colored stones which allow “elders” to speak to God.

              Because God wasn’t smart enough to forsee development of Magic 8 Ball.

              It’s all good!!!


              1. Funny you mention that. Urim and Thummim is what Jewish priests used to get a yes, no, or blank to a question according to the Old Testament. The modern day so called “Jewish” priests and Mormon elders copied that custom. Morons believe themselves to be members of a lost tribe (sorry I meant Mormons). Joseph Smith, a Royal Arch Mason (first part of the York Rite system), intended his church to be a higher echelon above the already existing 33 Masonic degrees.


            2. Scratch “literal” and replace with “metaphorical”.

              But one can see this IS THE TRICK to confuse the literal Hell out of everyone, yes???

              Metaphorical Jesus, Metaphorical Baptism, and on and on and on! Metaphorical Mary!

              Continue this to the extent religion does…the debate ad nauseum between ” literal” and “metaphorical” and one arrives at the world we have today!!

              A population of drooling idiots lined up to take a poisonous jab!!!

              I don’t want to join this / that party!!! No thanks!!

              With love!


        3. Does Thomas Cowan “believe” in gnomes and elves?

          In any case, you are shooting at the messenger. Do you have any useful commentary on the message?


          1. I’m saying this to be clear: if he does believe in gnomes, which his association with Skool dictates (why associate with a skool you do not believe in?), then why listen to anything ELSE he had to say?

            It’s Logic 101.

            If garden gnomes are an essential component of his makeup, PLEASE stop right there and go no further! HALT!!

            Liked by 1 person

            1. Recall too everything I said applies equally to this blog. I could apply same standards to those who post.

              But I don’t. We are all learning.

              But these people being rolled out as “experts” should be held to a higher standard!

              I’m with Greg on this one 🙂


            2. Rastus – I should have been more clear . . . Tom Cowan is only indirectly associated with the Waldorf school movement, in that many of his patients years ago came from Waldorf families, simply because he utilized anthroposophical medicine (Steiner-based) in his natural treatment of individuals. This is an article Tom authored in 2016, to give you a sense of his perspective (and one that is reflected in Waldorf pedagogy): In the article, he references stibium – which is a homeopathic I take for headaches (in fact, I just took it this morning, and it may be helpful right about now – wink, wink) . . .


              1. Returning to the topic and paper at-hand, following is an excerpt from a bio of one of the authors, Roberto Covino, on the Turonova et al paper:

                “My research focuses on developing and applying theoretical models, innovative computer simulations, and artificial intelligence to understand the dynamic organization of complex biological systems.”

                “My interests are highly interdisciplinary, bridging across physics, biology, artificial intelligence, biochemistry, and statistical modeling”:

                Under his research projects:

                “Modeling and simulations can facilitate the development of vaccines by revealing the dynamics of viral parts exposed to the immune system. Proteins like the spike of SARS-CoV-2 are highly mobile. Also, a layer of complex molecules called glycans cover the spike. Glycans are highly mobile, continually sweeping the surface of the spike, and preventing the binding of possible antibodies. Therefore, we think that glycans form a protective shield. Computer simulations put in motion atomistic structures resolved in experiments, and allow us to assess how dynamic and accessible the spike of SARS-CoV-2 is.”

                “We recently developed an atomistic model of the spike of SARS-CoV-2 embedded in a realistic membrane. Although produced independently, the agreement with electron tomography imaging of in situ spikes is stunning. Our model aided the interpretation of these images, clarifying the structure of the glycan shields and explaining the dynamic behavior of the long stalk region that connects the spike to the viral envelope. Additionally, by carefully studying the surface of the spike, we identified possible regions that could be targeted by antibodies.”

                Definition of atomistic modeling: To be clear, it is a component of computer simulations, which is what Covino explained he did with the spike protein in this experiment.

                In the Turinova et al paper, this was termed “Molecular Dynamics (MD) simulation” throughout. If you re-read the paper with this in mind (considering all of the components as virtual and not physically present), it begins to read differently with vastly different implications. I have to wonder if Dr. Dan Wilson (of “Debunk the Funk” You Tube Channel) knows full well this was all virtually contrived. His Ph.D. (from Carnegie Mellon, which I have continually highlighted as a hub for computational biology) is in molecular biology and with a research focus on ribosomes. I wonder where his research may come into direct or indirect play with this scam?

                From my understanding, and pertinent to “simulations”, this is how the “SARS-CoV-2 strain” (the linked paper MT provided attributed the G. Dobler and R. Wölfel, Bundeswehr Institute for Microbiology to providing SARS-CoV-2 strain MUC-IMB1) is typically supplied to “labs”: Therefore, I conclude, in the case of the Turonova study, it seems the entire experiment was computer simulated with their supercomputers (in this particular experiment – the Leibniz Supercomputing Centre). No actual biology took place, so there was no need for any actual virus or spike protein. The entire study was theoretical, as the virus was “bioinformatically” provided.

                I have posited this from day one. This is a virtual (in silico) virus, through and through. I also am highly skeptical there is any such “spike protein.” In this case, I do not align with Kaufman, as it seems he thinks there is a spike protein in the current injections – as per his email today:

                The End of Germ Theory
                Saturday June 12th 6pm

                My presentation entitled The End of Germ Theory will now include a new bonus topic: COVID-19 Genetic Vaccines: Magnetic Nanotechnology and the Toxicity of the S (Spike) Protein

                In this groundbreaking analysis, I will present the scientific rationale and new (May 2021) experimental evidence that empirically disproves the viral dogma once and for all. This will include the in silico genome analysis and the new paradigm of genetic vaccine technology! I have now added a critical analysis of nanotechnology and the Spike protein, the two major components of the Covid gene jabs.”

                While I do not concur that there is a spike protein in the injections, I am thrilled to see that Kaufman will be covering the nanotechnology components. Even if he is not familiar with my writing in this regard, I hope he at least finds his way to some of the many studies I referenced in multiple posts.

                So, to return to Rastus, it would seem that the same lab that performed this computer simulation experiment (us laypeople could misconstrue that a legitimate biological experiment took place), might as well have substituted a gnome for the spike protein, as they would have produced the same result.

                Liked by 1 person

                1. To clarify: the computer modeling experiment (as I described above) may not have taken place at the Leibniz Supercomputing Centre per se, but it did take place at one of the institutions acknowledged below:

                  The cryo–electron tomography data was collected at the EMBL Heidelberg Cryo Electron Microscopy Service Platform. The genome sequencing was done at the Genomics Core Facility of EMBL Heidelberg. We thank EMBL (B.T., W.J.H.H., S.M., A.S., and M.B.) and the Max Planck Society (B.T., M.S., S.W., F.E.C.B., S.v.B., M.G., S.M., R.C., G.H., and M.B.) for support and the Max Planck Computing Data Facility for providing computational resources. B.T. acknowledges
                  W. Wan (Vanderbilt University) for helpful discussions. J.K.L. acknowledges R. Eberle (PEI) for support. R.C. acknowledges the Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies for support. The authors are indebted to G. Dobler and R. Wölfel, Bundeswehr Institute for Microbiology, for providing SARS-CoV-2 strain MUC-IMB1. Funding: We acknowledge a generous SuperMUC-NG computing allocation at the Leibniz Supercomputing Centre (M.S., S.v.B., M.G., F.E.C.B., R.C.,
                  and G.H.), the Human Frontier Science Program (RGP0026/2017; S.v.B. and G.H.), the German Ministry of Health (C.S.), the German Center for Infection Research (C.H. and M.D.M.), and the Loewe Center…


                2. Stephers, that is impressive. You are such an asset to have writing here on our little blog. You took it to places I am not capable of going, and brought it home. Simulation never for a second crossed my mind.

                  Kudos, and well done.


                  1. MT – So, maybe you will keep me around a while longer?! (ha ha) Frankly, I read the paper a few times before grasping it was depicting a computational simulation. Initially, I was on a different (yet somewhat related) tangent, as Covino’s colleague, Gerhard Hummer, has extensively studied engineered nanoparticles (carbon nanotubes) I still have more digging to do, and will report back if I uncover anything of significance.


                3. Simulations, as in computer simulations…or physical simulations, are a key earmark for all these hoaxes.

                  9/11?…physical simulation on that very day. Simulation of what? Of a terrorist attack, of course.

                  Boston Bombing? Again, a physical simulation of a terrorist bombing.

                  London Subway Bombing? Yes, you guessed it. A simulation of a subway bombing.

                  Ad nauseum…

                  So why, with this extensive history of simulations, should Covid be a surprise? Do you recall the Johns Hopkins “simulation” back in Dec 2019 I believe? Event 201?

                  The idea is this: Replace reality with “virtual reality”, via mainstream TV and other ‘alternative’ means (such as Del Bigtree and Cowan and Mikowitz and Alex Jones).

                  And when in state of complete incapacity one can turn to their ‘elders’ and ‘priests’ to set one’s head and soul straight!!

                  And yes, they sure will!! 🙂

                  Liked by 1 person

                4. Agree w Mark, this is revelatory… I think some have hinted at this idea, but your comment helps it become a bit clearer, for me, and with more specifics.

                  Sounds like they run elaborate computer simulations, and then talk about it AS IF it were a real experiment – at least to the ears of any untutored laypeople. Definitely want to study up more on this. Mark, maybe clip this comment for its own post, and expand on it with your ability to put things down where the goats can get it?

                  And of course hope Stephers will do a post on the topic as well. I need to follow up some of those links. How widespread is this practice? Is this most of what “high level” covid research is composed of?


                  1. Question for you and everyone: If they do not openly say it is a simulation done on a computer, are they committing science fraud?

                    Wouldn’t that be something new!


                    1. Mark, I think you are correct about “science fraud” as it may apply to the fake pandemic.

                      In my ecosystem-protection work I’ve encountered computer-generated simulations of tree growth that forgot to stop growing at the usual maximum height, attaining a height of 300 feet (three times the average maximum) before someone (outside the government agency conducting the modeling “research”) noticed. Nobody, not congress, not the courts, nobody wanted to touch it, as it might negatively affect promotions, salaries, political careers, social fitness, etc., up and down the line of the hierarchies — all in on it.

                      Currently, I’m fighting computer models that allegedly assess wildfire risk, which in turn aids (inflated risk for propaganda use) in securing bigger budgets, more fire-fighting equipment and manpower without ever establishing a baseline of median risk (probability). Fear-of-fire porn is now a $multi-billion scam worldwide. Risk assessment that only looks at “consequences” (and not probability of an event) is no analysis at all, just propaganda (fraud, IMO).

                      Same with computer simulations (models) that estimate annual forest growth rates per acre. Same with “insect and disease” computer models that inflate tree mortality rates. There is insufficient real on-the-ground data to do this type of modeling accurately. Nobody cares. Of course, the computer produces whatever results are desired to “justify” more clear-cut logging and road-building and the bigger budgets needed to grow a bigger bureaucracy. I can’t even hire an independent modeling expert to debunk the fraudulent process used to simulate/extrapolate the inflated numbers. They’re rare as hen’s teeth and don’t want to jeopardize a gig down the road. It’s a small world out there sometimes.

                      Liked by 1 person

                    2. Steve K-

                      Those are interesting observations re simulation in the “forest and eco-system” industries. Reminds me of a short video by Tony Heller (realclimatescience). It’s not about simulations, but is about about tampering with the data re historical burn acreage, mostly to support the “global warming” agenda. And as you describe, likely aids in funding the wrong people or initiatives. As usual, Heller uses the NY Times’ (that great liberal propaganda rag) archives to paint the picture. Many Heller vids have been thrown off Youtube.



        4. Rastus – On the topic of gnomes, I can assure you (after spending nearly 10 years deeply involved in a Waldorf School community) that teachers and nurturing adults related to Waldorf schools do NOT believe gnomes are real. That has been a detrimental meme that has been conjured and virally spread – to discredit the positive aspects (there are some negatives as well) of Waldorf teaching. The concept of gnomes (and also fairies) in Waldorf schools is to creatively and aesthetically apply them for the benefit of teaching morals through beautiful stories and songs. I spent many a late night (when my children were very young) knitting and needle-felting gnomes in a lovely palette of naturally dyed yarns. They were used as playthings and as home decorations to instill lovely mythos that appealed to our family. These will most likely become heirloom playthings, as I have packaged and stored them away for safekeeping. To be clear though, my children never believed gnomes to be real, and that was never a message implied by me, nor their teachers. The cute little gnomes lived purely in fairy tales, which are central to teaching in Waldorf schools. My children were also raised without a belief in Santa Claus. Conversely, despite being raised Jewish, until the age of 8, I was led to believe that Santa Claus really existed, and I sent letters to the “North Pole” every year. I felt betrayed when I came to the realization that I was being misled and tricked. These are the same people who believe in viruses – the teachers and parents who lead their children to believe in a man who lives in the North Pole and desires that children sit on his lap. So, songs about gnomes in the forest do not even hold a candle to the trickery and beliefs associated with Santa.


        5. The elves and gnomes did not originate with Rudolph Steiner. I have read that the elves and gnomes are used as a tool to manipulate children and a gimmick to sell to parents. The schools were founded only a few years before his death and are said to be ‘based’ on his philosophy. After a hundred years rot has set in there just like everywhere else.


  2. “We’re fresh out of real viruses, but I’m sure we we can order that for you.”

    Sadly, most everything these days is reminiscent of a bit from Monty Python’s Flying Circus, “The Cheese Shop”


  3. Just my personal impressions here: Cowan strikes me as a very smart, nice and rational man. Gnomes are metaphorical, Steve’s definition, “…symbol, myth …” etc. was meant to draw a parallel between the virologists who sincerely believe they are dealing with an entity, and gnomes. I like it, it is funny, and It seems to be blowing by you.

    We had a little game we played when my kids were young. They told me that small bridges, the kind with roller bars, had trolls underneath. The trolls would hang from the bars, but if you drove over the bridge, the tires would hurt the fingers. I was told not to look in the rear view mirror, as I would see hands coming up between the bars, giving me the finger,

    Can I tell you this stuff without you assuming I believe trolls live under bridges? Can you drop it now?

    Liked by 1 person

    1. MT – Funny, I was actually going to reference trolls (and trolls who live under bridges), as our family’s favorite children’s book is The Toll Bridge Troll Even though our children are grown, we still keep that book by the bedside. Again, I can assure Rastus – neither me, nor my children (even raised going to a Waldorf school) ever believed in the realism of trolls. Yes, I do hope we can drop this nonsense – unless, that is, Rastus would enjoy me dropping a few notable stanzas from some whimsical songs featuring metaphorical gnomes.


  4. The Twilight Zone vibe is deep and strong with this “computer simulations beget pscience which guides public policy/herd mgmt.” It makes a lot of sense, somehow. It also perhaps lends credence to the “it’s all a sim” thing. Great stuff!

    What Steve wrote above about not being able to find anyone to “debunk the fraudulent process used to simulate/extrapolate the inflated numbers” was intense. The alienation from honest science and intentions is almost complete, gettin’ paid is the only way. Here in the southlands, “fire mgmt” consists of any random unauthorized plant that has the nerve to pop out of the parched soil near most human habitations and developments gets saturated with a green stink called “pre-emergence” a few times per year. To prevent fires…caused by weeds inches high, spaced apart…could not someone, somewhere, somehow have developed an alternate way to remove tall dry weeds? Oh, the pity there is no mechanical way to prevent fires. Whelp, let’s just pour many thousands of gallons of poison on it; where it’s going, what it’s doing, nobody knows, nobody cares. Muh fire prevention! 🙂

    Oddly, this observation gave me hope that the end of the clown world is near, and some “force” will soon step in to make it all “right” again. Nature bats last and all that.


  5. Yep.

    Hips, knees and ankles on a (virtual) spike protein, validated by a “consensus” of virtual programs, and an exquisitely visualized and nuanced “molecular dynamics simulation”. Tomographically correct.


  6. To be honest all this scientific/ medical jargon just gives me a headache . I’m pretty sure that is the general purpose of all this jargon . Remember when , for instance, job descriptions used to be in plain language so we could understand them? Now of course although they’re in English they are completely incomprehensible.
    As a lay person I have to rely on ” gut ” feeling when faced by an ”expert ” attempting to take over my mind and my instinct ( which has proven to be very accurate in the past ) tells me that Dr Cowan is one of the good guys. One indicator of this is that in his videos he really tries to make it simple for simpletons like me and NOT blind us with science…………….and pretty poor science at that in a lot of cases. He comes over as direct and honest. Compare him to slimy Fauci and Hancock for example.
    Cowan is obviously a highly educated man but his books are very readable with references that can be later checked by the reader. For now he has my full support.


    1. You’re making my point, in a back door fashion. I don’t demean Cowen or Kaufman, but your comment here is saying that what you think depends heavily on your impression if them. If you think they are honest, then you think what they think. That is all too common, I am afraid. In school we are graded and judged, the smart ones and the dumb ones, and we tend to live up or down to expectations. Even so, we were never taught to think, even the “smart” ones, just regurgitate. and it carries forward. Cowen went through years of medical brainwashing, and had to trash it all as he came to intellectual maturity, finally, years into his career.

      I went through the jargon from the paper with purpose, to demonstrate that we can understand what they are doing, but part of that understanding was bitching hard work, and this what it takes to use that muscle we all possess called a brain. No, we don’t walk away with full comprehension, but in expending the effort we slowly come to grips with the fraud called “virology,” on our own terms and by our own sweat, and not because an expert told us what to think. Don’t sell yourself short, as you are indeed capable. Otherwise you would not be at this website.


      1. The idea of attaining “full comprehension” may, in and of itself, be a fool’s errand. What if our universe is not made of “solid” objects, but of perpetually changing non-local forces that behave (too fast for us to apprehend) in patterns that create the forms we believe to be objects outside and separate from ourselves and our personal projections? This is, of course, unknowable, but allows possibilities beyond the limits of Aristotelian logic (dualistic).

        “The second learning step of differentiation may give rise to the dualism of Aristotelian logic. Such a logic is associated with the separating metaphysics that underlies much of Western culture. This is the metaphysics of dualistic divisions, often expressed by patriarchal norms of behavior and the rationality of Aristotelian logic and more recently, Boolean logic. In our contemporary culture this kind of dualistic logic has helped sustain a divided, unequal and mechanical society where symbols often become worshipped as idols. The predisposition that drives this separating view comes from an intellectual fondness that values explicit differences to the degree that they become barriers or exclusions. Here again there is a natural disposition that can change into an energetic pre-disposition, but this time we are dealing with the meaning of differences that arise through the use of the symbols of language or money. When these symbols are over-valued they automatically establish in us a predisposition for separation, usually in the form of a binary or dualistic thoughts and responses.”

        Beyond the “choice of two” exists a paradoxical universe where choices of A or B just don’t cut it anymore. There is C to consider, where A and B are possible, acting simultaneously in cooperation. Or consider D, where neither A or B can be true. This could open the possibility of a “dreamlike” universe of unlimited possibilities (new dimensions) in which we exist (as it exists inside us) simultaneously. Expanded logic certainly blows the lid off the pitfalls of “intellectual fondness” and false “predispositions” that limit our understanding, our possibilities, ie. nothing is “impossible,” and our potential for evolution of human consciousness.


  7. [video src="" /]


  8. Sorry that link is pretty useless. THIS is the link I was trying to highlight.

    Simple Strategies To Help Protect You And Your Family From Harm ( In A Toxic World) Webinar 5/21/21 TOM COWAN



    Here’s Huff-post further confusing the “climate change” issue.

    Clever messaging! Layered lies woven into a story dripping (fake, fake, fake) with compassion/emotion.

    #1: Climate change is real. That’s an undisputed given in the framing/narrative.

    #2: We need to do something, however hypocritical and ineffective. Nature’s (God’s management plan) not up to the task at hand, so accelerated (extraction/more $$$ please) management of forests must continue. Another given, no debate necessary.

    By focusing on “mature and old-growth forests,” NRDC and Earthjustice via Huff-post can ignore 90% of the forests already in some seral stage of succession following “natural” stochastic events (fire, wind, insects, etc.) or man-made events like clearcut logging, thinning, salvage logging, “prescribed burning” and roadbuilding (permanent clearcutting @ 8 acres/mile on average). These (90% +) perpetually-managed forests — tree farms — will never intentionally be allowed to reach natural “climax” again. If carbon sequestration mattered, trees are the least cost way to go. No capital investment required.

    Gas lighting, or what? Perception management is as old as the hills, used to pretend democracy and full and fair elections (that change nothing) and to avoid the fact that Biden = Trump= Obama= Bush II= Clinton= Bush I = Reagan, all the way back to when federal forest protection laws were written in the 1960s and 70s to limit old growth annihilation and species extinction. Laws were never good enough to prevent forest liquidation.

    Peace is still war. Sheep or mushrooms, it’s all the same endless bullshit.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s