Hi @thoughts-in-time :),
I stumbled right away over this sentence
how could I possibly go about disproving a thing that I cannot prove exists?
I would like to ask back:
How many things are there which you can neither prove nor dis-prove?
Isn't it another expression of "I am not an expert"? I don't want to be a pain... but we've heard this argument so many times theses days, that I feel great resistance against it.
Is it, because when I ask: "Why can't I chose whether I want to believe in a thing, may it be Aids or any other disease?" that also includes those who DO believe in the voices of experts and that leads to the dilemma that it's then all about beliefs?
I I solve this question for myself in the only way that seems sensible and possible to me: insofar as a disease afflicts me, I only believe that it has a lethal or dangerous effect when I am close to death. Otherwise, I say it is a matter of taste what I prefer to be afraid of. It sounds strange, I know. I am someone who prefers to let things unfold and wait and see is actually the better option in my terms and experience. Only, since I'm not alone in the world, this weakens my attitude, if no one else is also prepared to wait and a - as they say, critical mass - decides in favour of action, then I've probably pulled the card of misfortune.
The question that drives me is that if so many people believe in the safety of vaccination and they really think that they are helping not only themselves but others through it, are they then committing a huge self-deception or is the field that is created through it actually a field influenced by the psyche? Within which, despite possible poisons in the injections, the individuals convinced of the positive vaccination effect actually become "immune"? Where does it begin that the mind is able to influence matter? I don't think it is possible to know for sure, only to assume, that there is more to human consciousness than pure materialism suggests. Rupert Sheldrake, though, wants to inspire to do research on this. It's discredited as para-psychology, but for me that makes it all the more interesting.
I ask myself this because my reaction to people who say they have already been vaccinated is always the same. Once they have done the act, I don't want to burden them with my negative thoughts because my scepticism might worry them and they might doubt the good effect. How to a dear person we do not want to arouse doubt about a treatment when he himself firmly believes in it, do we not?
It is only very painful when, conversely, one experiences that this tolerance of the opposite way of thinking - one does not believe in the positive effect - is swept off the table in such a hard-hearted, imperious and inconsiderate way.
What do you think?
Hey there, @erh.germany! It's a little bit more involved than "I am not an expert." Many of the proponents that disregard the virus theory of disease claim that isolation of the virus in the lab is impossible. That said, it is two-fold depending on what you believe, if you believe the assertion that the virus is impossible to isolate without the improper utilization of Kary Mullis' invention. It means that even if you are an expert, you don't have anything other than the wrong tool to do the job.
It's like, that's a nice hammer, but I cannot use it as a floodlight to light my path in a forest. I'm at the losing end of both of these arguments. I am not an expert. However, even if I were, I would not try and use a hammer as a flashlight. However, that doesn't mean there's not something in the forest that's causing people to die, either. But without the right tools, I'm just a blind man in the dark, subject to the unrestricted confines of not only mine but also everyone else's imagination.
I chose not to go with the original title because I think the immune system exists. I tend to believe, correctly or incorrectly, that it can get run down for many different reasons, not just the potential HIV hypothesis, whether that is true or untrue. That got a bit intricate and wordy, but I hope it helped more than it harmed in conveying my take on the matter. I don't claim to know the whole truth about anything, only what seems to be true to me at the time. And I'm with you on this one. I'm not taking the vaccine.
Thank you for further explaining what you think.
I see it the same way. And that's why I have a hard time being confronted with such a strong front, those people who state that they talk about "facts".
What do you understand by an "immune system"? That's crucial, I think.
I think of something which can perhaps use this term "immunity". But I tend to see it both material and non material. For the lack of a better term I would call it "mind in connection with matter-influence". In this whole debate it seems that the "mind"-thing has been forgotten. It's all about materials.
To not lose myself (in nihilism) I have made up my mind.
Sincere greetings to you.