Horius Parry

4.8K posts

Horius Parry banner
Horius Parry

Horius Parry

@HoriusParry

"All events arising between the earth and its ionosphere can be regarded as structured capacitor losses; this applies to human beings" - Konstantin Meyl

UK Katılım Haziran 2017
27 Takip Edilen348 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Horius Parry
Horius Parry@HoriusParry·
The Library of Atlantis The Heart is not a Pump 5G and Covid Do Viruses Exist? Healing Frequencies The Biofield Hypothesis Electromagnetism and Blood The Cytopathic Mirror Effect Graphene Oxide library-of-atlantis.com/2022/11/13/pop…
English
1
5
26
0
Horius Parry
Horius Parry@HoriusParry·
@MartinZ_uncut This is all word salad, supposition and irrelevancies. Viruses are claimed to spread actual disease. Show us: Evidence of transmission in a clinical setting. How the epidemiology (of influenza for example) could possibly be caused by 'spreading'.
English
0
0
0
1
Martin Zizi
Martin Zizi@MartinZ_uncut·
yada yada yada... yawn Sorry viruses do actually exist. PLEASE share . To all reading here - let's kill this "canard" - from the genetic only... You may share all this for FUN as it will be clear to all, specialist included, but also funny for the non specialist 1. Some - rightfully so, speak about exosomes. Exosomes are bits of DNA and RNA enveloped in a phospholipids membrane, with some targeting molecules on their surfaces. They exist for cells inside our body to communicate and exchange GENETIC regulators.. it is a kind of coordination mechanism. They can at times be shed... and we "presume" it could; be either fortuitous or lead to inter-individual exchanges ... we do not understand this in full. 2. In the RNA vaccinated persons, there are reports and molecular evidences that the encapsulated RNA was shed by some of the jabbed... This was NOT OUR genetic material exchanges, but the SPIKE RNA. 3. So there are people who - in good faith or in 'delulu' mode who claims that VIRUSES do not exist, that their are IN US and are a reaction of shedding by our body when we are sick... so some claim NO virus to make us sick... (and they cite Pasteur and the Koch Postulate... etc...) BUT .... 4. I - as a molecular scientist - would have no problem with that interpretation if it was borne by ALL consistent data and not contradicted by some STRONG evidences. When some data points refute one's hypothesis, it means that it is WRONG ... and hence that they destroy this view. - Problem #1 is that the viral capsides (the viral gens are wrapped in either lips, or proteo-lipids) contains various genes that are NOT humans .. For the NO VIRUS EVER view to be correct, these INNER viruses should only carry human genes - Problem #2 . The gene sequences from viruses are even built using a codon BIAS that is different from us and all animals, all fungal and alll plants). Why is this relevant? while the genetic code/language is universal, different kingdoms of life use different "patois". The 'patois' is akin to this differentiation of the codon USAGE when a gene is translated into proteins. So the virus patois is like a different language of DNA and RNA that slightly differs from ours and from bacteria. Imagine Ameringlish vs teh Queen's english - both understand each other but we speak and write differently. For the NO VIRUS EVER view to be correct, these INNER viruses should only speak our own patois - if they originate from OUR genes. - Problem # 3. The viral genes are naturally POLY-CISTRONIC. This is like magic, imagine that WHITHIN the SAME DNA sequence, one can encode 2 different functional proteins .. A bit like a book would contain TWO different novels with different plot and characters , and to switch from one to the other, one just needed to shift the reading off the words by ONER SINGLE letter! Impossible right? Well viral gens are sELECTED for that feat, one des a frame shift and.. here to comes an entirely DIFFERENT protein or protein domain ... Virus do taught because they are small and NEED to optimize their genes in the smallest possible volume/length. Our own gens do not! For the NO VIRUS EVER view to be correct, these INNER viruses should only carry NON POLYCISTRONIC genes. - Problem #4 . Another problem with that view is that bacteriophages exist - those phages -one of my most prized research activity - are viruses targeting SOLELY bacteria and not animals, nor plants. So here there are NO humans in the loop... This is a huge problem for the NO VIRUS EVER view to be correct, and when we speak to the NO Virus proponents, they recognize the problem but claim "it is an exception" :) Do I need to add that we also can find viruses of VIRUSES - wow.. not only NO humans in the loop, but not even living cells! [Note you can find interesting pics in electronic microscopy of such viruses being parasites of other viruses] - Another problem is that Elementary virus WITHOUT envelope exist and are called transposons. WE are in fact at living inside a sea of genetic mist, with bits and parts floating all around us. Dr Craig Venter from TIGR and Celera , had these nice screening programs like the AIR genome project, the Sea genome project, and even .. the space genome project.. whereby using filtration, he could find unknown genes or parts of them out there... CCL - - As I wrote, there are so many things we do not yet know :). But what I know and taught for sure, is that science is NOT religion, it is a method.. This method is based on REFUTATION.. this means if some data contradict your hypothesis, you change the hypothesis... NOT the data! - Now to be complete - and I gladly grant them that - we were lied to for SARS2. I fully agree that we had a PCR-based pandemics with 80 % false cases, which means 80% of the people were NOT sick. But THIS does not mean that viruses do not exist.. But for those who were sick, the denial of rapid and appropriate care for the first 8-10 days was fatal! - I also agree with them, that most viruses are NOT DIRECT pathogens to us... we are just host or symbionts to them... And to illustrate that point - ands cheer them up - i will end with a very provocative but CORRECT fact... In the far past the earliest mammals included some virus into their own genome.. These viruses were among other coding for a gene family called syncitins... Without that genetics, there would be NO uterus, and the human female would still lay eggs.. like the platypus! I would like to know how they would feel about that :)
Tyrell Corporation Operations@tyrellcorp_ops

@MartinZ_uncut No, there is no "mutational drift" as there is no mutation. No virus, no hantavirus. No hantavirus, no hantavirus mutation, or anything else.

English
6
9
14
917
AGIHound
AGIHound@TrueAIHound·
@HoriusParry The published overlapped of the red and green (L) curves (M) are obviously wrong. I can see it with my own eyes.
English
1
0
0
10
AGIHound
AGIHound@TrueAIHound·
Neuroscience: color perception I've been thinking about this image. It shows the published color sensitivity response curves of the 3 cone cells in the retina. Something is wrong with it. It makes zero sense and it's driving me nuts. 🤪 The response curves of the green (M) and red (L) cones strongly and inexplicably overlap. And yet, I can clearly distinguish the 3 colors as if there was very little or no overlap. Is it just me? I don't think so. I'm beginning to suspect that there is something wrong with the experimental methods used in measuring the spectral sensitivity of cone cells in the lab. Now, I feel compelled to investigate this anomaly further even though it's outside the main focus of my research. I hate it when this happens. 😬😀
AGIHound tweet media
English
9
1
14
801
Horius Parry
Horius Parry@HoriusParry·
@TrueAIHound .. before going to the brain! You don't see these colours but the transformed colours. CIE Lab is perceptually uniform and this is verified by experiment. The closeness of the red and green curves leads to increased sensitivity between the colours - not ambiguity.
English
1
0
0
28
Horius Parry
Horius Parry@HoriusParry·
@TrueAIHound The eye sees these colours but they are translated to colour differences before going to the eye. In Lab space L = lightness a = red-green difference b = blue-yellow difference CIE colour space and observer curves en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CIE_1931_…
English
2
0
2
38
Stuart Hameroff
Stuart Hameroff@StuartHameroff·
Did evolution really create consciousness? Are you certain? Thats the assumption but assumes life started, developed and evolved even before genes. Why purposeful behavior against entropy to survive and reproduce without reward, without feelings, without some form of pleasure? It’s more likely phenomenal experience is fundamental as proto-conscious noise which gets orchestrated by biology, e.g. microtubules. sciencedirect.com/science/chapte…
Robert Graham@robertgraham

Richard Dawkins is very smart, but the first thing people assume in response to his article is that he was stupid. Nope, he was smart. For example, he asks the question how evolution created this "consciousness". LLMs like Claude are very useful and smart, and so are humans. We can imagine how survival-of-the-fittest would select for "intelligence". But what evolutionary advantage does "consciousness" bring? (If you'll recall, Dawkins is the second most famous evolutionist after Darwin).

English
24
11
95
6.5K
Dr Clare Craig
Dr Clare Craig@ClareCraigPath·
Why do people jump to the assumption of human transmission? A simpler explanation would be a disease rat got on board the ship.
English
31
48
374
35.1K
Divinely Designed
Divinely Designed@DivinelyDesined·
The incredible DNA Repair System DNA - and Life - cannot exist without it. It requires 6-7 sub-systems working together + a massive complex network of 130–200+ unique proteins. Simpler versions don't work. Only Intelligence designs systems like this.
English
145
521
2.2K
84K
Horius Parry
Horius Parry@HoriusParry·
@skdh Better imagined as a spinning field vortex The spin is field spin and so no mass spins and so no angular momentum. Negative field gives short range repulsion and mimics 'charge' Equatorial forces give long range attraction (gravity) thereby giving the impression of mass
English
0
0
1
237
Roman Bystrianyk
Roman Bystrianyk@RBystrianyk·
@WHOSEARO Notice that all infectious disease deaths fell by almost 100% before your doses. Ask yourself why.
Roman Bystrianyk tweet media
English
24
195
677
18.2K
Jamie Andrews
Jamie Andrews@JamieAA_Again·
One is a Lemon, the other has never come near a citrus fruit and is the Chinese industrial chemical process making pills from some toxic unnatural products. A short thread 🧵
Jamie Andrews tweet media
English
27
92
273
17.4K
truthache
truthache@truthache68·
🧠✨ Why might a person want to consider that the earth is the geocentric dielectric plane of inertia? In this model, the universe is a toroid, and humans are living inside of biblical cosmology—inside of a closed system. 🤔 (vanquishtheveil)
English
20
39
186
6.4K
Horius Parry
Horius Parry@HoriusParry·
Debunking Consciousness in Quantum Detection The double-slit experiment raises questions about 'detection' and its impact on interference patterns. Claims suggest human consciousness may influence outcomes, yet there is no evidence to support this. library-of-atlantis.com/2026/05/01/deb…
English
0
0
0
30
Alex Boge
Alex Boge@alexboge·
@HoriusParry Yes and yes, duh! Try doing even a tiny bit of research!
English
1
0
0
14
Alex Boge
Alex Boge@alexboge·
The Foucault Pendulum terrifies flat earthers. Because deep down, they know it conclusively and undeniably proves Earth is a slowly rotating globe. So they have to make it go away. They have to invalidate a 175-year-old experiment that conclusively demonstrates both rotation and sphericity - simultaneously, in real time, in public, all around the globe, for free. Here’s how it works: suspend a heavy weight on a long wire and set it swinging. In an inertial reference frame - meaning the universe itself - the pendulum maintains its plane of swing. But the floor beneath it rotates. At Paris, the pendulum’s apparent swing direction rotates roughly 11° per hour - completing a full circuit in about 32 hours. The rate depends on latitude, and in the other direction in the opposite hemisphere, exactly as predicted by a rotating sphere. Not a disc. Not a stationary plane. A rotating globe. Flat earthers love to shriek: “They have to push it or use a motor!” Yes - after it naturally stops due to friction. Any assist is only ever applied once the pendulum has wound down on its own. Never during operation. This is observable by anyone in the room. Some pendulums have no mechanism at all - just a publicly visible push to restart. Air resistance is real. Friction is real. None of this is a conspiracy. It’s physics. And none of it matters anyway, because the pendulum only needs to run a few hours to demonstrate Earth’s rotation. It does this effortlessly. Every single day. In museums around the world. The pendulum doesn’t lie. Only flat earthers do. Which once again proves: Gotta Lie to Flerf.
Alex Boge tweet media
English
36
21
152
16.3K