From: Carole on

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname(a)ratbags.com> wrote in message
news:q5e2e415dlti9pmn88e7ighg465u5pumvu(a)4ax.com...
> awthrawthr(a)gmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Sep 29, 1:48 am, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>>> awthraw...(a)gmail.com wrote:
>>> >On Sep 27, 11:57 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>>> >> "Carole" <hub...(a)iimetro.com.au> wrote:
>>> >> >One can only speculate why the germ theory of disease took off like
>>> >> >it did.
>>>
>>> >> No speculation necessary.
>>>
>>> >> When you have two competing theories and one is supported by evidence
>>> >> and the other is not, then the one with the evidence wins. In this
>>> >> case there wasn't any real competition between theories, because one
>>> >> was never going to become more than a hypothesis.
>>>
>>> >> One can only speculate why the heliocentric theory of planetary
>>> >> motion
>>> >> took off like it did.
>>>
>>> >> --
>>> >Bechamp is validated by the Grayfield Optical Ergonom 500 microscope,
>>> >which shows living viruses in action. Scroll down to see the two
>>> >videos on "Humoral pathology" and "Symbiosis or Parasitism":
>>>
>>> >http://www.grayfieldoptical.com/online_videos.html
>>>
>>> Bechamp cannot be validated by any virus. Remember, it's all in the
>>> soil, not the germs.
>>
>>The Ergonom 500 microscope can see living viruses which gives it an
>>advantage when looking at bacteria because there are a series of steps
>>where the virus transforms into a bacteria WHICH CAN BE SEEN ON
>>THROUGH THE MICROSCOPE.
>
> I repeat - according to Bechamp's fanboys, viruses and bacteria mean
> nothing, because "the soil is everything". If someone is seeing a
> virus transmuting into a completely different form of life, a
> bacterium, then that person is either mistaken or delusional.

You haven't been paying attention.
"The germ is nothing the soil is everything" means that the bacteria only
change into nasty forms when the environment gets toxic. If the internal
milieu is clean the bacteria assume a very benign form.


>
>>
>>Of course to cross-eyed bastards the things are a hoax.
>
> The thing is a hoax to anyone with a smattering of scientific
> education.

No, you would have been correct to say, "The thing is a hoax to those who
have been dumbed-down and taught a corrupted form of science."

carole
www.conspiracee.com


From: Carole on

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname(a)ratbags.com> wrote in message
news:vt23e4tf6u7sm58cegstv850frgnidaa1i(a)4ax.com...
> awthrawthr(a)gmail.com wrote:
>
>>On Sep 29, 3:29 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>>> awthraw...(a)gmail.com wrote:
>>> >On Sep 29, 1:48 am, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>>> >> awthraw...(a)gmail.com wrote:
>>> >> >On Sep 27, 11:57 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>>> >> >> "Carole" <hub...(a)iimetro.com.au> wrote:
>>> >> >> >One can only speculate why the germ theory of disease took off
>>> >> >> >like it did.
>>>
>>> >> >> No speculation necessary.
>>>
>>> >> >> When you have two competing theories and one is supported by
>>> >> >> evidence
>>> >> >> and the other is not, then the one with the evidence wins. In this
>>> >> >> case there wasn't any real competition between theories, because
>>> >> >> one
>>> >> >> was never going to become more than a hypothesis.
>>>
>>> >> >> One can only speculate why the heliocentric theory of planetary
>>> >> >> motion
>>> >> >> took off like it did.
>>>
>>> >> >> --
>>> >> >Bechamp is validated by the Grayfield Optical Ergonom 500
>>> >> >microscope,
>>> >> >which shows living viruses in action. Scroll down to see the two
>>> >> >videos on "Humoral pathology" and "Symbiosis or Parasitism":
>>>
>>> >> >http://www.grayfieldoptical.com/online_videos.html
>>>
>>> >> Bechamp cannot be validated by any virus. Remember, it's all in the
>>> >> soil, not the germs.
>>>
>>> >The Ergonom 500 microscope can see living viruses which gives it an
>>> >advantage when looking at bacteria because there are a series of steps
>>> >where the virus transforms into a bacteria WHICH CAN BE SEEN ON
>>> >THROUGH THE MICROSCOPE.
>>>
>>> I repeat - according to Bechamp's fanboys, viruses and bacteria mean
>>> nothing, because "the soil is everything". If someone is seeing a
>>> virus transmuting into a completely different form of life, a
>>> bacterium, then that person is either mistaken or delusional.
>>
>>As one can easily see confirmed on the Ergonom 500 microscope video on
>>Humoral pathology, the terrain is what determines the activity of the
>>microbes.
>
> Like I said - anyone seeing viruses transmuting to bacteria is either
> mistaken or delusional. Add lying to those possibilities.

And how would you know that Peter, since the old microscopes can't show it?
So how would you know that a virus can't mutate into a bacteria and vice
versa, since its never been shown before?

carole
www.cellsalts.net


From: Peter Bowditch on
"Carole" <hubbca(a)iimetro.com.au> wrote:

>
>"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname(a)ratbags.com> wrote in message
>news:vt23e4tf6u7sm58cegstv850frgnidaa1i(a)4ax.com...
>> awthrawthr(a)gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>On Sep 29, 3:29 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>>>> awthraw...(a)gmail.com wrote:
>>>> >On Sep 29, 1:48 am, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>>>> >> awthraw...(a)gmail.com wrote:
>>>> >> >On Sep 27, 11:57 pm, Peter Bowditch <myfirstn...(a)ratbags.com> wrote:
>>>> >> >> "Carole" <hub...(a)iimetro.com.au> wrote:
>>>> >> >> >One can only speculate why the germ theory of disease took off
>>>> >> >> >like it did.
>>>>
>>>> >> >> No speculation necessary.
>>>>
>>>> >> >> When you have two competing theories and one is supported by
>>>> >> >> evidence
>>>> >> >> and the other is not, then the one with the evidence wins. In this
>>>> >> >> case there wasn't any real competition between theories, because
>>>> >> >> one
>>>> >> >> was never going to become more than a hypothesis.
>>>>
>>>> >> >> One can only speculate why the heliocentric theory of planetary
>>>> >> >> motion
>>>> >> >> took off like it did.
>>>>
>>>> >> >> --
>>>> >> >Bechamp is validated by the Grayfield Optical Ergonom 500
>>>> >> >microscope,
>>>> >> >which shows living viruses in action. Scroll down to see the two
>>>> >> >videos on "Humoral pathology" and "Symbiosis or Parasitism":
>>>>
>>>> >> >http://www.grayfieldoptical.com/online_videos.html
>>>>
>>>> >> Bechamp cannot be validated by any virus. Remember, it's all in the
>>>> >> soil, not the germs.
>>>>
>>>> >The Ergonom 500 microscope can see living viruses which gives it an
>>>> >advantage when looking at bacteria because there are a series of steps
>>>> >where the virus transforms into a bacteria WHICH CAN BE SEEN ON
>>>> >THROUGH THE MICROSCOPE.
>>>>
>>>> I repeat - according to Bechamp's fanboys, viruses and bacteria mean
>>>> nothing, because "the soil is everything". If someone is seeing a
>>>> virus transmuting into a completely different form of life, a
>>>> bacterium, then that person is either mistaken or delusional.
>>>
>>>As one can easily see confirmed on the Ergonom 500 microscope video on
>>>Humoral pathology, the terrain is what determines the activity of the
>>>microbes.
>>
>> Like I said - anyone seeing viruses transmuting to bacteria is either
>> mistaken or delusional. Add lying to those possibilities.
>
>And how would you know that Peter, since the old microscopes can't show it?

No microscope can show it, because it simply can't happen.

>So how would you know that a virus can't mutate into a bacteria and vice
>versa, since its never been shown before?

Has there ever been a case of a cat mutating into a cockroach? How
would you know that it can't happen since it's never been shown
before?

Here's a hint - a virus isn't the same sort of creature as a
bacterium, so a better analogy would be a cat mutating into a cabbage.

>
>carole
>www.cellsalts.net
>

--
Peter Bowditch aa #2243
The Millenium Project http://www.ratbags.com/rsoles
Australian Council Against Health Fraud http://www.acahf.org.au
Australian Skeptics http://www.skeptics.com.au
To email me use my first name only at ratbags.com
From: Carole on

"Peter Bowditch" <myfirstname(a)ratbags.com> wrote in message
news:3646e4508ecm31v6mcf43otataihl0qfnb(a)4ax.com...
> "Carole" <hubbca(a)iimetro.com.au> wrote:
>


>>>
>>> Like I said - anyone seeing viruses transmuting to bacteria is either
>>> mistaken or delusional. Add lying to those possibilities.
>>
>>And how would you know that Peter, since the old microscopes can't show
>>it?
>
> No microscope can show it, because it simply can't happen.

Obviously you are one who believes in "one germ, one disease". This is known
as monomorphism.
The opposite of monomorphism is pleomorphism which is where a bacteria or
germ can change forms or mutate according to its environment.

>
>>So how would you know that a virus can't mutate into a bacteria and vice
>>versa, since its never been shown before?
>
> Has there ever been a case of a cat mutating into a cockroach? How
> would you know that it can't happen since it's never been shown
> before?

No, not a cat into a cockroach.
However, over many generations animals do mutate to suit their environments.
And the lifecycle of a virus or germ is very short and they can do many
generations relatively quickly.

>
> Here's a hint - a virus isn't the same sort of creature as a
> bacterium, so a better analogy would be a cat mutating into a cabbage.

I don't think anybody really knows what a virus is.
It appears to be an inert little piece of dna that doesn't come to life
until it gets into an a certain environment.
Bacterias mutate. I find it hard to believe that a bacteria can mutate into
a fungus though, but maybe it can.
One thing they all have in common is that they are very small and we can't
see them with the naked eye.
This is where a microscope that could look at their lifecycle without
killing them would come in handy.
And there is a history of tragedy that afflicts those who would pursue this
line of research.

Suppression of the Rife Technology
http://www.thefinchleyclinic.co.uk/nojavascript/therapies/rife/fate.htm


carole
www.cellsalts.net


From: D. C. Sessions on
Carole wrote:

> "The germ is nothing the soil is everything" means that the bacteria only
> change into nasty forms when the environment gets toxic. If the internal
> milieu is clean the bacteria assume a very benign form.

That's a lovely notion, Carole. It has a few theoretical problems at
the biological level (as in, forget genetics and biochemistry, which
are totally incompatible with the notion) but the biggie is really
much, much simpler: if you start out with the "benign form" and only
the "benign form" then no matter what you do to the "environment" you
never get anything else. Full stop.

This little experiment has been repeated millions of times, including
my secondary school biology lab -- in other words, this is one of
the relatively rare cases where I have actually carried out the
experiment myself and so your usual "think for yourself" attack ain't
gonna work.

--
| The brighter the stupid burns, the more |
| chance that someone will see the light. |
+- D. C. Sessions <dcs(a)lumbercartel.com> -+