Legally Speaking
A Precedent set by Lanka v Bardens
All of the content that is put out on this Substack is going to be for free. If you feel so inclined to donate or Sign up for a Paid Subscription that is very much appreciated. It will keep me writing, putting out content and continuing the largest Control Studies Project falsifying Virology.
24/11/2011, German Virologist Dr. Stefan Lanka offered a prize of €100k for a scientific publication in which the alleged existence of the "Measles Virus" is proven He did this to raise awareness to what he believed was fraudulent science behind mandatory Measles Vaccinations.
This Challenge was undertaken by Dr. David Bardens who submitted 6 papers he believed proved the existence of the Measles Virus and took it to Ravensburg Regional Court on non payment. An Ad Hoc judgment was made 12/03/15 by Judge Schneider before any rebuttal from Dr.Lanka.
See Below the Judges clear words denying Lanka a full rebuttal where he had prepared a 70 page FULL scientific document to back up his claim.
This Ad Hoc judgment ordered Lanka to pay the prize money to Bardens and is practically the ONLY news you hear in the mainstream.. Lanka appealed the decision and it was taken to the Stuttgart Higher Regional Court.
Alot of the information I want to talk about relating to this case took place at the Lower Court where the court appointed “Supposedly Neutral” expert, Dr.Podbielski was Cross Examined.
They focus much of the examination on one specific paper by John Enders in 1954, the so called Isolation of the Measles virus which was coincidentally the first time the technique of Cell Culture Isolation was used and is still used for EVERY Isolation of a virus in Virology
In cross examination of this paper Podbielski makes 2 huge admissions. 1. This Paper has "No Negative Control" 2. It DOES NOT fulfill Koch's Postulates, which are scientific criteria laid out for proof of existence of a pathogen.
Podbielski tries to fob off the lack of control in the paper as being an "old paper" on which to build. This is a massive problem as you will see soon.
He also tries to glaze over the the fact that it doesn't fulfill Koch's Postulates and in a stunning admission none will. This is THE MOST IMPORTANT part of the entire trial, it is what the final conclusion and Lanka’s WIN is based upon.
He also lays the foundations for what is used by those who wish to lie about this trial ; that "they *could* satisfy kochs Postulates but it would have to be very very long paper. This is a made up fluff for the 0 evidence that he had to admit he had and the judges agreed.
The reason why the trial is heavily focused on Enders 1954 paper is because it is the supposed isolation of the virus All other papers presented such as genomic sequencing, EM, protein analysis, PCR etc HAVE to have an isolated virus as a reference, without it NO PROOF as there is no benchmark for knowing WHAT you are meant to be looking for.
To note, this trial wasn't short of comedy as we see here "expert" Podbielski clashing with Robert Koch Institute Dr. Mankertz disagreeing with each other over wether or not a virus *should* contain a ribosome!
Going back to the comments made by Podbielski of "missing negative control". This was really only half true. The control was not "missing" it categorically FAILED. The effects meant to denote the presence of a virus were found in the uninfected sample.
As Part of the Trial the first of his Control Studies which he would later build up on in 2022 taking the exact protocol used to Isolate “Sars Cov 2” namely Vero Cells, FBS and Antiobiotics with NO SAMPLE.
As you can see by the fixed and stained plates after starvations 1 and 2 there is considerable CPE with noted morphology that is supposed to indicate the presence of a “virus”
So we move onto the Appeal at the Higher Court of Stuggart. This trial is pretty procedural. The judge lays out that he deemed that the work needed to be in a SINGLE Scientific Paper. He rightly says that he doesn’t want a patchwork of single sentences from thousands of papers.
There is a huge cry that "Because More than One was submitted Lanka got off" This is touted EVERYWHERE as to why Lanka won. It is a total and utter LIE that is incredibly easy to prove. It is spelt out clearly here that there was no limit to the amount of papers you could submit.
This is a huge excerpt that is repeatedly lied about by the media in which it states that the theory that …. “ all of the papers in summation provide evidence of existence….are NON OBJECTIONABLE”
THE HIGHER COURT RULING TRANSCRIPTS
The judge has STIPULATED the prize was for A SINGULAR Scientific work…. so he states that the baseless opinion of Dr. Podbielski needn’t be considered or debated hence for it “Non Objectionable”… Alot of clowns out there want to try and make out that the Judge is AGREEING to this statement but that is 100% a lie.
This is confirmed by the Judges words recorded AFTER by Feli Popescu who was AT the court hearing.
So to conclude what has happened over the course of the Trial in simple terms: At the Lower Court, Dr. Podbielski admitted that NO SINGLE paper satisfied Koch’s Postulates for proof of existence of a virus.
On Appeal the Judge gave Lanka the Win because the terms of the bet stated that Lanka wanted ONE paper.
So let’s have a look at the 6 Papers Submitted:
1. Enders JF, Peebles TC. Propagation in tissue cultures of cytopathogenic agents from patients with measles. Proc Soc Exp Biol Med. 1954 Jun;86(2):277–286.
2. Bech V, Magnus Pv. Studies on measles virus in monkey kidney tissue cultures. Acta Pathol Microbiol Scand. 1959; 42(1): 75–85
3. Horikami SM, Moyer SA. Structure, Transcription, and Replication of Measles Virus. Curr Top Microbiol Immunol. 1995; 191: 35–50.
4. Nakai M, Imagawa DT. Electron microscopy of measels virus replication. J Virol. 1969 Feb; 3(2): 187–97.
5. Lund GA, Tyrell, DL, Bradley RD, Scraba DG. The molecular length of measles virus RNA and the structural organization of measles nucleocapsids. J Gen Virol. 1984 Sep;65 (Pt 9):1535–42.
6. Daikoku E, Morita C, Kohno T, Sano K. Analysis of Morphology and Infectivity of Measles Virus Particles. Bulletin of the Osaka Medical College. 2007; 53(2): 107–14.
You will note the Enders “Isolation” which was debunked in his own paper with the control exhibiting CPE (LOL). But I would like to draw your attention to paper number 5. The claimed full genome sequencing and length of the Measles Virus.
This trial is huge in that it has set a Precedent for what constitutes as evidence for the existence of a virus. In this case BOTH THE EXPERT AND JUDGE AGREED in their statements and conclusions that NO SINGLE paper constituted evidence of the existence of a virus.
THEREFORE…. the genomics ON IT’s own, according to this LEGAL precedent does not constitute evidence of existence.
HERE are the results of the Control Studies Project… Impeccably written up by Sarah.
As part of the Control Studies we have FALSIFIED the cell culture isolation method. Given that Christine Massey has confirmed with her FOIA requests that ALL Viruses in every UN country are ONLY isolated in Cell Culture, we have falsified ALL virus isolation. This combined with the work of Dr. Stefan Lanka we have shown this to occur in both HEK293 cell lines AND Vero cell lines leaving little doubt that this will be similar in all others, although we hope to carry out the experiments to prove this.
We have also, through EM found numerous particles that are indistinguishable by looks alone to claimed “viruses”, thus we have falsified the EM papers.
The next part to the control studies project that is currently underway is doing Whole Genomic Sequencing of the control cultures, i.e with no possibility of a virus in them.
This is a part which I think is crucial to show the general public that the PCR test was based on nothing, If we falsify downstream of the PCR, i.e the supposedly MORE accurate area of WGS then we have FALSIFIED every area of Virology.
The IMMEDIATE aim of this project is to PREVENT 2020 from happening again. It was a Scamdemic that was TOTALLY 100% ONLY able to occur with the fraudulent PCR test. They had to admit that False Positives did occur and Asymptomatic Positives meant it CANNOT be used as a diagnostic of disease. However this did not stop the State from CLAIMING that the PCR could show evidence of the existence of “Sars Cov 2”.
If we return back to the Precedent set in Lanka v. Bardens, we will note that NO single paper proved the existence of “Measles”. This INCLUDED the FULL genome sequencing. So here we have a legal vehicle ALREADY from the results of The Control Studies Project. Because we have falsified the OTHER areas of supposed evidence such as Isolation and EM, we have ALSO falsified using Genomics because that alone does legally not constitute evidence.
Here I will provide an English translation from an audio recording that was made during the measles trial in Stuttgart (Higher Regional Court) with Dr. Lanka, where one can read what the judge said, which is a bit different from what was written down in their ruling. This audio recording was given later to Feli Popescu who was also present at the trial and my translation was made from her Romanian translation of the audio recording.
https://johnblaid.substack.com/p/an-audio-translation-from-dr-stefan
Wow!!
My favorite line: "the genomics ON IT’s own does not constitute evidence of existence"