French version in pdf.
English version in pdf.
As we saw in the previous article on the creation of the Jews, since there were in reality no Jews before approximately 1700, the elite could not possibly reveal that the Jewish birth rate was very high between 1700 and 1900. Otherwise, given their small numbers, people would only have to do the math to realize that there could not have been any Jews prior to the 18th century.
For humanity, the situation is somewhat different. The elite effectively accepts the idea that the birth rate was quite high. However, given current population figures, and without some demographic limiting factor, one would inevitably conclude that human beings could not have existed before the 13th or 14th century. Consequently, the elite had to introduce limiting factors.
There is, of course, the explanation regarding a lack of food. Population growth was supposedly limited by recurring famines. But that is not convincing. Once agriculture was discovered, humanity had access to enough food to multiply rapidly. And very quickly, humans learned how to preserve food for long periods. So, the stories about famines are false. It is possible that, in a given region, there might have been a food shortage on a few rare occasions. But overall, food was not an issue. We were like animals with access to tons of food and no predators to kill us. That was bound to lead to rapid population growth.
Since the lack-of-food explanation was not convincing enough, another argument was needed. So, the elite fostered the idea that people were dying in droves from microbial diseases-especially at birth or during childhood, as this explained why they did not live long enough to reproduce. This made the idea of humanity's long history credible: the population grew slowly because, despite high birth rates, many people died from microbial diseases.
And suddenly, one realizes that these diseases are absolutely essential to the official narrative. Without the history of microbial diseases, people would realize that humanity must have emerged only around the 13th or 14th century. This is the only obstacle preventing the realization that humanity is far less ancient than official history claims.
As long as people had little education-and, more importantly, as long as the official narrative was that of the Church, which allotted humanity a mere 6,000 years and spoke of great catastrophes like the Flood wiping out part of the human race-this issue barely existed. However, the shift to the modern narrative (the theory of evolution)-which asserts that humanity as a species has existed for hundreds of thousands of years-created a problem. Hence the concurrent invention of the theory of microbial diseases to explain why the human population grew so slowly.
Consequently, one might assume that to uphold the official historical narrative, the elite would do whatever it takes to preserve the theory of microbial disease.
And indeed, up until 2020, the elite did everything in their power to render invisible any attempt to challenge the concept of contagious disease. I know this because I began doing just that around 2003. Each year, I monitored whether others shared this theory and whether my writings were gaining recognition. I observed that the elite were highly effective at keeping me invisible; there are very few links to my blog from Google or other search engines-even when adding the site's name-and absolutely none without it. As a result, finding the site is extremely difficult.
And for years, practically no one else championed this idea, apart from Stefan Lanka. Two or three times a year, I would search on Google or other search engines using keywords like "viruses don't exist," "viruses are a scam," and so on, in both French and English. Before 2020, I came across perhaps only three or four people advocating this view, but in a negligible way-writing the equivalent of just a page or two of text on the subject, and that was it. Nothing substantial or in-depth. And then, they would disappear from view. I also visited the most conspiracy-oriented websites and forums, yet found nothing of interest.
It is possible, of course, that such people existed but went unnoticed by me because the elite rendered them just as invisible as it did me. Still, I feel that over the course of fifteen years, I would have eventually stumbled upon at least two or three like-minded individuals. Yet, even if there were a few such people who were simply impossible to find, the conclusion remains the same: the elite successfully ensured that this type of idea stayed unknown.
Perhaps I was little known because I wasn't doing it right. That's possible.
However, I did try to defend the idea on a few forums. And forums have an audience-or at least they did back then-so plenty of people could read what I wrote. Yet, even there, I received virtually no positive response. After all, when the elite wants an idea to be adopted, they dispatch numerous agents to post highly enthusiastic comments.
The only other person championing this kind of idea was Stefan Lanka (an agent; see the appendix). From 2001 onwards, he presented ideas similar to mine, albeit in a seemingly far less developed manner (in terms of the volume of published articles and the level of detail analyzed). Given that he was an agent and a well-known figure within the AIDS dissident community, one might have expected the elite to publicize this aspect of his work as well. Yet, that did not happen. This clearly demonstrates that the elite did not want this idea to spread prior to 2020. They only began to truly highlight it from 2014 onwards, and solely in relation to the measles virus. And his fame remained limited to a still fairly small circle of people. So, why did the elite have operative Lanka develop these ideas as early as 2001, only for them to remain obscure for nearly two decades? They could easily have simply had him develop the theory much later. I think it was to have a pioneer to present later. The goal was to prevent these ideas from spreading for twenty years while ensuring there was a famous precursor to present subsequently within the "no-virus" movement of 2020.
In short, it was really from 2020 onwards that the "no-virus" movement exploded. Until 2020, the elite did everything in their power to ensure that the notion of microbial diseases being a complete fabrication never even crossed the minds of the general public-or even those deeply immersed in conspiracy theories. Everything made sense.
It was the elite who launched conspirationism
To understand what follows, one must realize that it was the elite who launched the conspiracy movement. They created all the conspiracy movements-whether concerning 9/11, AIDS, moon or space missions, the Jews, historical revisionism, the Illuminati, anti-Satanism, Covid, the "no-virus" theory, recentism (new chronology), the concept of "false flags", and so on.
They did this to fuel one of the two opposing sides in the Third World War. On one side would be the conspirationists and Islamist camp; on the other, the mainstream liberal camp and the nationalists. In other words, on one side you would have the "Islamo-leftist" camp, and on the other, the far-right and the "extreme center." The entire Satanist faction would align with the latter group.
It's true that, currently, the "Islamo-leftist" camp is also Satanist-given its defense of the woke movement, LGBTQ+++ groups, and so on-which actually makes the alliance between leftists and Islamists completely incoherent. However, one might surmise that by the time World War III arrives, the Islamo-leftist camp will have been purged of its woke elements.
The unbelievable happened in 2020: the "no virus" movement
Returning to the issue of medicine and virus theory: starting in 2020, with Covid, something incredible happened: people began questioning the very existence of viruses. And they met with significant, almost immediate success. I am referring to Andrew Kaufman, Tom Cowan, and Samantha Bailey.
Now, that might seem like a good thing. The problem is, they are all agents. I know this because, as I mentioned, I have been questioning the concept of contagious diseases for twenty years. Every year, I would research whether others shared my views, yet I had never heard of the three individuals in question before 2020.
To begin with, it is extremely odd that these people suddenly appeared in 2020, having immediately grasped everything there is to know about viruses. Such a level of mastery over the subject does not happen overnight; a gradual learning process is inevitably required. Yet they arrived with instant, innate knowledge from the very start.
Furthermore, as I demonstrated in a previous article that was deleted by Google, the biographies of Kaufman and Cowan are highly suspicious.
And above all, the fact that they achieved immediate success-with so many people singing their praises all over the place-clearly indicates that they are operatives. Anyone who champions that sort of idea and immediately becomes famous and celebrated is bound to be an operative. Someone who isn't one remains-like me-completely unknown. And the few positive reactions they do elicit are, the vast majority of the time, extremely lukewarm-the sort of "yes, that's vaguely interesting" response.
Moreover, they didn't just gain recognition within conspiracy circles; they were cited-again, almost immediately-in the mainstream media. That is something virtually impossible for genuine dissidents.
So, these people are agents. But if they are agents, that implies the "no-virus" movement of 2020 was launched by the elite. And that presents a major logical problem.
Indeed, as we have just seen, contagious diseases are crucial to the historical narrative imposed by the elite. If one calls them into question, it can very quickly lead to questioning the historical narrative itself. People might then conclude that humanity is far less ancient than official history claims. This leads directly to the "recentist" theory.
The scenarios I considered to explain this oddity
Back in 2020, when I saw that the "no virus" movement had been launched by the elite, I told myself there was no way they would actually want to call the existence of contagious diseases into question. I hadn't yet grasped the issue regarding the historical narrative-which is crucial-but there were nonetheless significant reasons why the elite wouldn't want to touch that. It would undermine public trust in mainstream science. It would validate the entire conspiracy theory perspective. This isn't some minor conspiracy like the moon landings; it's massive.
So, I had considered several hypotheses.
I reasoned that the elite actually wanted to uphold the principle of contagious diseases, but under a new concept-that of exosomes, an idea championed by Kaufman. Exosomes would behave much like viruses, only under a different name. This would serve to ensure that nothing changed. The "no-virus" movement would, in fact, be completely harmless.
Alternatively, they might simply have wanted to orchestrate a temporary "no-virus" movement, with its leading figures disappearing relatively quickly and leaving no one to take their place-thereby preventing truth-seekers from discovering genuine medical dissidents (like myself).
The elite does indeed appear to act this way at times regarding certain dissident movements. They create a fake one that garners all the publicity, thereby diverting conspiracy theorists away from the genuine dissident movement-which challenges the subject matter more deeply and may even extend beyond its initial scope. Subsequently, they ensure the fake movement becomes mired in insignificance and eventually dies out; the publicity it receives steadily dwindles until it vanishes entirely. In this way, the movement is ultimately forgotten, save for a few particularly "awake" individuals. This was the case with AIDS. In short, since the elite fuels these movements, they need only stop doing so for the movements to disappear on their own.
Another version of the temporary nature of the movement: to eliminate it by violence. The elite might have launched the "no virus" movement, only to wipe it out violently at the end of World War III. They would then have repressed it harshly for decades to prevent its resurgence-a scenario that could apply to the conspiracy movement as a whole.
I also considered the possibility that the elite might stage their own disappearance during the war, thereby rendering conspiracy theories obsolete.
It also occurred to me that by improving living conditions after the war, the elite could make Western populations happy; and if people are happy, they will no longer pay any attention to conspiracy theories.
Thus, there would be no risk in allowing challenges that are highly inconvenient for the elite to gain traction, since they would have only a limited lifespan.
However, what seemed fairly certain was that the elite did not actually want to discard the theory of contagious diseases in the long run.
And now that we have seen the problem with the official historical narrative, it seems even less likely that the elite would want to do that, because it would also call into question the antiquity of humanity-and therefore the entire official history that has been imposed through massive propaganda for the past 200 years.
Even so, it remained strange that the elite had gone so far in questioning its own medical propaganda. After all, even if the elite manages to stamp out the very dissent it introduced, there is a significant risk that the knowledge revealed by that dissent will persist among thousands of individuals and resurface later on. This risk is particularly acute if the elite intends to spread this dissent to a large segment of the population. After all, it would only take about ten books-each a few hundred pages long-for it to make a comeback. And text files of that length take up only a few megabytes-practically nothing given today's storage capacities and internet speeds. With just a few well-synthesized works, the "no-virus" movement could re-emerge within a few years, even after being all but eliminated.
And why reveal such explosive facts? The few theories already circulating within dissident circles were more than enough. 9/11, the moon landings, AIDS, the Illuminati, historical revisionism, and so on-that was amply sufficient to fuel the dissident movement. There was no need for such far-reaching revelations.
So, the fact that the elite is revealing this truth is, all the same, very strange.
The other major oddity that appeared in the conspirationist world about 10 years ago: recentism (new chronology)
If that were the only thing, it would already be strange. But, at a push, it might pass.
The problem is that this isn't the only oddity to have emerged in the conspirationist world recently. There is also "Recentism", that is "New Chronology".
In the title, I mention that it emerged ten years ago. In reality, it dates back forty-four years, as Anatoli Fomenko's first book on "Recentism"-Some New Empirico-Statistical Methods of Dating and the Analysis of Present Global Chronology-was published in 1981. However, since Russia was still communist and the Internet did not yet exist, there was little chance of the book becoming known outside a very small circle of people. Consequently, Fomenko only began to gain recognition around 1993, following the publication of "Geometrical and Statistical Methods of Analysis of Star Configurations Dating Ptolemy's Almagest". Yet, the spread of his theories to the general public required the development of the Internet, which delayed the emergence of Recentism as a movement of opinion until at least the year 2000. But, for another fifteen years, Fomenko and just two or three others were the only ones voicing such ideas; thus, no genuine Recentist community yet existed. The concept was so radical that it took time for people to engage with it.
So, it was really only around 2015 that the movement spread widely and began to attract a significant number of adherents. That was also the time when several individuals-including Anthelme Arvière-took things much further than Fomenko. In terms of the movement itself, then, "recentism" has truly been on the conspirationist scene for only about ten years. It may have started a bit earlier in Russia-perhaps twelve or even fifteen years ago-but in the rest of the world, it has been around for about a decade.
And once again, this is a movement launched by the elite. I discussed this in my article on Asia: Fomenko is clearly an agent of the elite. Since he was the first to speak about it, that implies the movement was initiated by the elite.
And that is extremely bizarre, because-even more so than the "no-virus" movement-it represents a truly massive challenge to the status quo. This isn't just run-of-the-mill conspirationist movement; it is conspirationism on a monumental scale. It endangers the elite. It completely undermines the official historical narrative. Once again, the elite could easily have done without this particular conspiracy movement. Smaller-scale conspiracies would have been more than enough to generate a significant conspiracy movement during the Third World War. So, why put themselves at risk when it wasn't necessary?
One could argue, then, that it was done to forestall any challenge from genuine dissidents before such a challenge could even arise.
That argument might hold water if there had been a strong likelihood of people spontaneously questioning the established timeline of history. But the fact is, even in the 2000s, no one in the conspiracy movement-myself included-was prepared to go as far as "recentism." It seemed completely insane, truly too extreme. Virtually no one believed in it.
So, if even the most seasoned conspirationists-like myself-couldn't buy into "Recentism" after learning about it, there was absolutely no risk of anyone coming up with the idea without the elite's help. No one would have thought of it spontaneously. So why draw attention to that area when no one suspected a thing?
Of course, just as with the "no-virus" movement, one might argue that the elite is going to wipe out the conspirationist movement during World War III anyway. So, they could spill all the most incredible secrets-it wouldn't matter. In the end, nothing of it will remain.
However, as mentioned earlier, there is always the danger that people might store this information and that it could resurface sooner or later. Consequently, revealing it remains extremely dangerous.
I had also considered the possibility that the elite might want to impose the "recentist" theory-but specifically Fomenko's version, which is less explosive and radical than others that emerged later. Yet, there is a risk that people might propose far more subversive alternative theories. Once the concept of recentism takes hold-and given that there are enough arguments to lend it some credibility-things could easily spiral out of control in a direction the elite did not intend. Moreover, it actually appears that the elite themselves launched some of the more radical versions, which undermines the idea that they wanted to limit recentism solely to Fomenko.
So, in this respect too, the fact that the elite is spreading this truth remains very strange.
A possible paradigm shift
Consequently, given my recent reflections on a potential resurgence of religion-and considering the issue of contagious diseases in the context of "recentism"-I am led to consider the possibility of a different strategy on the part of the elite regarding conspirationism.
It is possible that the elite intends to shift the paradigm and genuinely impose these currently dissident theories. When one combines the questioning of established history and the germ theory of disease with the return of religion, the picture begins to make sense.
Indeed, if the elite wants to revive the Christian religion in the West, that changes everything. They would then be able to fundamentally challenge the antiquity of humanity-and thus the current version of history-and impose the "recentist" theory. Furthermore, no longer needing to conceal the age of the human species-or at least not to the current extent-they could call into question the theory of contagious diseases. This would mark a return to the situation that existed prior to the 19th century.
The elite could then abandon the theory of contagious diseases without issue, since there would no longer be a need to hide rapid human population growth.
It is true that the Bible states the world is 6,000 years old. That already represents a significant shortening of human history, and it might suffice within the framework of moderate "recentism." However, it remains too long a timespan compared to certain more radical recentist theories. Yet, the Church does not rule out the possibility of catastrophes. Thus, it is entirely possible to posit a catastrophic event occurring just a few centuries ago-hence the "mud flood" theory promoted on various recentist websites. Then, it's ok: humanity could have emerged 6,000 years ago, only for a planetary catastrophe to wipe out most of the population a thousand years ago or a few centuries back. Humanity would have been forced to start virtually from scratch, thereby losing all memory of its pre-catastrophe past.
Incidentally, this would explain the strong desire among proponents of the mud flood theory-and most recentist theories-to attribute a pre-catastrophe past to humanity, rather than simply positing that humanity appeared out of nowhere just a few centuries ago.
Logically, the elite will also call into question the theory of evolution and the existence of dinosaurs.
Of course, that too is a scam. And for a very simple reason. If the theory of evolution were true, then there would be heaps of intermediate species around even now, in our own time. Let's suppose a dog evolved into a horse and that this process required 20 intermediate species. Since those intermediate species were necessarily viable, a large number of them should have survived and ought to still exist today. And this applies to all animals. For every two final species, there should easily be ten surviving intermediate species. Likewise, among the ancient animal bones found in the ground, the majority should belong to intermediate species rather than the two final species. Intermediate species would not be virtually impossible to find; instead, they would make up the overwhelming majority of the fossil record. And we would never have needed Darwin, since the reality of evolution would have been right before people's eyes since the dawn of time. It would have been self-evident all along. Yet, there are no intermediate species today. And we find practically none in the fossil record. This clearly shows that we are not the result of evolution spanning billions of years. We were created.
And when you look at the intellectual state of humanity, we certainly weren't created by a god. No god would create a bunch of morons like this.
So, if the elite wants to abandon the official narrative regarding history and contagious diseases, they will most likely abandon the theory of evolution and that whole dinosaur story as well.
The fact that flaws were introduced into paleontology supports this view. Indeed, given that dinosaurs are an invention of the elite, it follows that all the bones discovered were created by agents. Yet, had that been the case, the elite would have had no trouble commissioning fake bones of intermediate species. They could have thus filled that massive gap in the official narrative. While this wouldn't have resolved the issue regarding the absence of intermediate species today, it would at least have addressed the problem concerning species from the past. Consequently, critics of the theory-creationists-would have had significantly more difficulty imposing their point of view.
However, the elite did not have bones of intermediate species manufactured. And if they refrained from doing so-despite facing no obstacles to such a move-it implies they intended for the theory to be challenged in the future. They deliberately laid the groundwork for the theory of evolution to be called into question.
Until the theory presented in this article was put forward, this intentional flaw in the official narrative seemed inexplicable. Now, however, everything makes sense.
And of course, if dinosaurs never existed and the Earth is not billions of years old, this calls into question the theory that oil formed from dinosaur fossils or Carboniferous plants. Hence the theory of abiotic oil. One might wonder how it came about that this theory was developed by mainstream scientists (notably Soviet ones)-and thus by agents. The reason is that, once again, it was the elite who authorized the unveiling of this theory. And they did so because, when the paradigm shift occurs, the old theory regarding the origin of oil will need to be replaced.
However, the elite have already put theoretical safeguards in place to maintain the notion that the supply of accessible oil is nonetheless limited (see my French blog on this topic). Consequently, there is no risk of this leading to the idea that accessible oil is ultra-abundant and that oil prices should naturally be very low.
Another possibility-though less certain-is a shift from democracy to an absolute monarchy in several European countries. Indeed, democracy is unstable. While it has served the elite well over the past two centuries by accounting for shifts in public opinion, policy changes, and the like, the post-World War III era might require a degree of political stability in Europe to foster high birth rates and drive a fiercely nationalist-and potentially expansionist-agenda. Furthermore, a sovereign ruler could mandate a return to Christianity and ensure its continued strength for decades. The issue is that democracy entails a certain freedom of opinion; yet, during the paradigm shift, it would be preferable for a strong authority to lock down the discourse, thereby enforcing the new paradigm and sweeping aside the proponents of the old narrative.
Another possibility is a despot-someone who either does not found a dynasty or establishes one that is short-lived (lasting only through the direct heir). Since people live so long nowadays, if such a leader came to power at thirty-five, he could still be in charge fifty years later. He could then pass power on to his son, extending the regime's duration by another thirty years. Eventually, this nascent dynasty might be replaced by something else, but it will have enabled the elite to maintain the same policies for eighty years.
However, this is not a certainty; the elite possesses such a capacity to shape public opinion that they could leave democracy intact while successfully maintaining the same nationalist, pronatalist, and other policies for a century. This approach could even aid them during the transition phase. Indeed, fostering the illusion of freedom of opinion makes it possible to justify the existence of numerous competing theories on various scientific subjects. It will then create the impression that a particular theory has prevailed fairly-that is, through "scientific consensus."
It is also possible that there is a monarchical regime, but that on scientific matters, a certain freedom of thought remains. After all, the 19th-century paradigm shift in medicine-the transition from Hippocratic theory to the modern model-occurred under regimes that were predominantly authoritarian.
Thus, the situation remains quite open and only moderately predictable. Let's just say that practicality would lead us to the hypothesis of dictatorships; but that is merely a possibility.
The importance of the mud flood theory for reconciling recentism and the return of the Christian religion
The "mud flood" theory is essential for reconciling "recentism" with the resurgence of the Christian religion. Indeed, the most extreme recentist theories undermine the very foundations of Christianity. If humanity has existed for only a few centuries and Antiquity never occurred, then Christianity is a complete fabrication. Christ, the apostles-it is all entirely bogus. Therefore, one cannot simultaneously embrace the return of the Christian religion and recentism; they are inherently contradictory.
The same applies to the Jewish religion. If Antiquity did not exist, then Judaism must necessarily be a recent invention. Consequently, if Israel is to dominate the Middle East and Jews are to ally with Christians, the elite cannot allow recentism to become the official historical narrative.
But with the "mud flood" theory, everything changes. The elite can claim that the Bible is true-that Christ really existed and humanity is indeed 6,000 years old-while explaining that a massive catastrophe occurred a few centuries or a millennium ago, wiping out humanity's collective memory. Suddenly, the problem vanishes. Another advantage is that the Church can claim evil began ruling humanity from that point onward; if everything prior was forgotten, it was because of Satan. It all fits together. And if a messiah arrives to defeat Satan and found a new religion, that works even better.
As for the story of Christ, the Church can place him either before the mud flood or at the start of the new cycle; it doesn't really matter. Since everything was forgotten, they can say whatever they like. The same applies to the history of the Jewish people.
Furthermore, the mud flood is essentially the Great Flood, just with added mud. So, it aligns perfectly with the biblical narrative.
As a result, scientific conspirationism must also take hold on the Right
I had previously hypothesized that conspirationists would be eliminated by the elite during World War III, since they would align with the "Islamo-leftist" camp in Europe and the "woke left" camp in the US. This would have allowed the elite to continue imposing their lies for another 100 or 200 years. However, it appears that will not be the case. But for that to happen, both sides would need to be conspiracy theorists.
It would have seemed incredible for something like this to happen just two or three years ago. Yet, since then, conspiracy thinking has spread across the American Right-and at the highest levels. Indeed, Trump has nominated Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as Secretary of Health. Kennedy alleges a link between vaccines and autism and, consequently, seeks to scale back the vaccination schedule. He is not the only figure on the Trumpian Right to criticize vaccines; the American Right also questions global warming. Some even talk about "chemtrails"-including Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Republican Congressman Greg Steube, and various local Republican officials. To hardcore conspiracy theorists, this might seem like small potatoes, but compared to the past, it represents a massive shift. And if my theory is correct, this conspirationist trend will go even further within the American Right.
In any case, once they start down that path, they are very likely to go further; there is no reason to think they would start believing in certain conspiracy theories only to suddenly stop in their tracks.
So what will probably happen is that the current official narrative will be destroyed in both camps. It won't be a case of conspiracy theorists on one side and defenders of the official narrative on the other; there will be conspirationists on both sides.
Consequently, following the US Civil War and World War III, a new science will emerge: the conspirationist science. It will easily gain acceptance among the general public, as its proponents cannot be suspected of corruption. In this way, the power of influence of science will be completely revitalized. Thus, conspirationists will not be eliminated; they will triumph. Left-wing conspiracy theorists will be eliminated-not because they are conspiracy theorists, but because they are left-wing.
As a result, the divide would not really be about conspiracy theories, but essentially about religion and race. Previously, I thought the two camps would be opposed on the grounds of religion, race, and conspirationism.
Outside the US, there are a few right-wing politicians who promote conspiracy theories.
One example is Andrew Bridgen in England. A former Conservative Party member who shifted to the far right in 2023, he now champions conspiracy theories regarding vaccines and COVID-19. The same applies to Trevor Lloyd-Jones and Alex Stevenson of the Reform UK party (see here). Other British politicians from Reform UK-such as David McLennan and Andrea Whitehead-have spoken about chemtrails. Others still, like Lynn Murphy, have questioned global warming.
In France, there is Florian Philippot, a former executive of the National Front. He has been championing various conspiracy theories since the onset of Covid (i.e., since 2020). And he was almost certainly tasked with doing so. Like the others, he is an operative. It is true that its influence is relatively limited. Yet, the mere fact that a far-right politician in France is espousing such ideas is a significant indicator. In the past, such a thing would never have been possible.
In Germany, there is apparently Christine Anderson of the AfD (Alternative for Germany), who has "described the Covid-19 vaccination campaign as a 'crime against humanity' and a global conspiracy hatched by health elites."
So, it is not just happening in the US; we are seeing this in Europe as well.
What is possible is that there are mostly left-wing conspiracy themes and right-wing themes, as well as common themes. In this case, when the right wins, the left-wing themes will be swept away.
Also a shift regarding political conspirationism: right-wing antisemitism in the United States
Antisemitism is part of political conspirationism, not scientific conspirationism. However, it is interesting to observe the evolution of the American Right on this issue. Indeed, a fringe of the American hard right has recently developed a narrative critical of Jews. This is the case with Nick Fuentes, who has rapidly become a very popular figure in those circles.
Regarding antisemitism, I held the same view as I did for scientific conspirationism: I thought it would be swept away in the US during the Civil War and in Europe during World War III. Consequently, the victors of the US Civil War (the Right) would support Israel during World War III.
However, this posed two problems regarding the expulsion of Jews to Israel during the US Civil War.
The first problem was that the US Left was supposed to be antisemitic as well as conspirationist, whereas the US Right was supposed to be anti-conspirationist and pro-Semitic.
The issue is that if the pro-Semitic Right wins the US Civil War before World War III breaks out, then European Jews expelled during World War III could go to the US instead of Israel. For instance, suppose the American Civil War ends in 2040 (with a victory for the pro-Semitic Right) and World War III begins in 2045; in that scenario, European Jews could flee to the US. And that is obviously not what the elite wants. Therefore, Jews must remain *persona non grata* in the US even after the Civil War, ensuring that European Jews have nowhere else to go but Israel.
A second problem for the USA is that each side will control part of the country during the civil war. This means that if the right-wing faction were pro-Semitic, Jews could remain in the USA throughout the conflict. Therefore, the right must also be antisemitic to force Jews to leave for Israel. They could go to Europe, since World War III would not yet have broken out; however, conditions there would already be so dire that virtually no American Jews would go there. Thus, for this reason as well, it is necessary for the US far-right to be antisemitic.
In that scenario, the US Right would be both anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim. It would therefore aid Russia in its fight against a Muslim Europe, yet without supporting Israel. That role of supporting Israel would then fall solely to Russia and possibly China. I had assumed the US would support Israel during World War III, but apparently, that won't be the case.
That said, it is possible that once Jews have been expelled from the US, the US government might come to view Muslims as a greater threat than Jews and support Israel during World War III-at least indirectly (while still barring Jews from returning to the US). There could be twisted decisions of this sort, or unlikely shifts in alliances. We shall see.
If the US fails to provide support, the elite might plunge the Middle East into chaos before World War III breaks out. This could prove useful if Russian and Chinese aid were expected to be delayed. It might explain why Israel would not be overrun despite the lack of support from a major power; with Iraq, Iran, and other nations fractured into rival factions, they would no longer pose a threat to Israel, thereby allowing it to survive this perilous period.
The problem of right-wing antisemitism in Europe
For Europe, the picture is less clear.
There will not be a civil war, but rather a takeover of power by Muslims in certain countries. Subsequently, they will overrun the other European nations. Thus, Muslims will control all-or nearly all-of European territory. Jews will have no part of the territory where they can take refuge, forcing them to leave. This leaves the European Right the option of remaining pro-Semitic.
The problem is that Jews will likely be expelled-or will want to flee Europe-seven or eight years before the outbreak of the Third World War. That war will probably last only four or five years, as was the case in the past. Consequently, a period of eleven to thirteen years will elapse before Jews can return to Europe.
And presumably, this timeframe will not be long enough to deter Jews who were expelled from-or fled-Europe from wanting to return. Of course, there will almost certainly be very strict immigration rules following World War III. However, most of the Jews in question will be European nationals to begin with. Consequently, it will not be possible to prevent their return through immigration laws.
This implies that the victorious side (the Right) will be compelled to adopt an antisemitic stance to block the return of Jews to Europe. Or, at the very least-even if not overtly hostile-it will not be favorably disposed toward them.
Then again, the European elite might employ a different strategy. We shall see.
Regarding the shift in scientific paradigm, the European Right could be both pro-Semitic and conspirationist. The two are not mutually exclusive. Therefore, Europe's evolution toward a new scientific paradigm faces no major obstacle in this regard.
The theory of cycles
A link can be drawn between this paradigm shift and the theory of cycles advocated by some proponents of recentism.
There are two types of cycles in this theory.
The first type involves society starting over from scratch following a planetary catastrophe, such as a "mud flood." According to proponents of this theory, such events occur every 800 to 1,000 years. Not only would humanity be reduced to a few hundred thousand individuals, but it would also be thrust back virtually into the Stone Age. These cycles would not be driven by the actions of an elite but by unavoidable natural disasters. Consequently, the elite would suffer the catastrophe just like the rest of humanity. However, thanks to their knowledge, they would be able to anticipate the event and preserve both accumulated knowledge and a certain amount of sophisticated technology; this would give them a decisive advantage over the rest of humanity, enabling them to dominate it during the subsequent cycle. In this type of cycle, there would be no fundamental change in society or science; instead, there would be a regular repetition of a similar pattern of development-akin to the "eternal return of the same" described by Nietzsche.
The second type is far less radical. It involves cycles characterized by the erasure of certain bodies of knowledge, and grounded in new scientific ideas and a new societal organization. In this scenario, humanity would not be starting from scratch-far from it. These cycles would be much shorter, lasting only 200 or 300 years, and would be initiated by the elite. Unlike the first type of cycle, the goal here is not to repeat the events of the previous cycle, but to achieve something different. This is the view held by Anthelme Arvière, who argues that the elite set a new cycle in motion starting with the French Revolution. Apparently, others advocate similar ideas.
It is this second type of cycle that we are currently experiencing. Indeed, if the elite knew a catastrophe was imminent, they would not be going to such lengths to trigger a third world war and advance their plans for the expansion of the white race. The fact that they are doing so implies they know there will be no global catastrophe for a very long time.
It is worth noting that, without explicitly speaking of cycles, the elite is promoting a narrative of a "reset"-most notably through Klaus Schwab and his 2020 book, *The Great Reset*, a work aimed at a segment of the general public. Perhaps this is a trap and no reset will actually occur, but perhaps they are simply preparing minds for this shift.
I hadn't put much stock in this hypothesis until now, as it seemed to me that the next century or two would essentially be a continuation of the past. Of course, I foresaw wars, the rise of nationalist movements, the expulsion of immigrants, the end of feminism, and so on. But, I believed that the West would remain within the framework of more or less secular democracies and the prevailing scientific and historical narrative. Society would evolve, but it would not fundamentally change.
However, as we have just seen, it appears that a revolution will indeed take place-at least on a scientific level. As for political organization, we are dealing more with speculation.
Yet, rather than speaking of a new cycle, I believe we should speak of a new stage. After all, the elite's objective will remain the same: to expand the white race. So, in reality, nothing will truly change.
The concept of a cycle is, therefore, essentially a falsehood. Regarding what truly matters to the elite, there is a continuous progression toward achieving the primary goal. Of course, societal changes sometimes occur to bring this about. And since these periods last a long time, it is tempting to resort to the idea of a cycle. But they are merely stages in the elite's project.
In fact, the concept of a cycle is clearly a smokescreen designed to conceal the elite's true long-term goal. According to cycle theorists, the elite's sole objective is simply to maintain its position. By ensuring that the people forget their past-and thus the very existence of the elite-the latter could remain in power. Yet, there is no obvious reason why the elite would do this; after all, it already exercises total control over an unsuspecting populace. It has absolutely no need to regularly reset society to sustain its long-term dominance. However, by leading conspirationists to believe that the elite seeks only to preserve its position, cycle theorists prevent them from considering that it might have a different objective.
Admittedly, making the people forget the past could be useful for concealing the elite's long-term objective. Indeed, the problem with the project in question is that it is so gigantic that it could end up being visible. However, that won't become an issue for several hundred years. Consequently, the elite won't need to trigger collective amnesia anytime soon; there is no need for a "reset" right now.
Nor would there be any need for multiple, successive resets; a single one would more than suffice.
Moreover, the elite could easily manage without inducing collective amnesia. They could simply make matters so complex that no one understands what is happening, even while collective historical memory remains intact. They could also maintain silence around genuine dissidents, limiting their audience to a few hundred people.
Furthermore, as discussed in this article, the elite could create the impression that they have been defeated and no longer exist. Consequently, the very notion of a global conspiracy would vanish at that point. And should the Christian religion make a powerful comeback-or a new religion take hold-it might even become dangerous to argue that this new state of affairs stems from an elite plot rather than the will of God. Claiming that the leaders of the Holy Church are controlled by the Satanic elite responsible for World War III would be deemed heretical and could be punishable by imprisonment or even death. Such individuals might be viewed as followers of the Evil One, seeking to restore the Satanic society that existed prior to the Messiah's arrival-the sort of thing that lands you straight on the stake.
And even if-say, by the year 2200-pressure from the Church or the authorities were to ease, making it possible once again to voice conspiracy theories, it likely wouldn't make much difference. People probably wouldn't return to conspirationism. Indeed, as we have seen here, today's conspirationism is entirely propped up by the elite; without them, the movement would likely remain in a nascent stage. One need only look at what happened with AIDS dissent. In the early 2000s, there was a strong dissident movement, but it was entirely initiated and sustained by the elite. From the day the elite both reduced publicity surrounding AIDS and removed most of its dissident agents of influence, the movement collapsed. It is currently seeing a slight resurgence thanks to the "no-virus" movement, but between 2010 and 2020, it was on its deathbed.
Thus, it is entirely possible that the elite does not need to resort to mass amnesia to conceal its true objectives.
A short list of conspiracy theories initiated by agents of influence-and thus by the elite
I mentioned earlier that it was the elite who launched the conspirationist movement. Here is a short list of conspiracy theories apparently initiated by agents. I will cite here only those theories that are essentially true.
Regarding AIDS, it originated with the Perth Group. However, Eleni Papadopulos-Eleopulos did not seem particularly brilliant. Of course, intelligent people can appear quite ordinary. Still, it is odd. And it is extremely surprising that three people at the same hospital held the same conspiracy-minded views on AIDS at a time when such ideas were virtually unthinkable. Furthermore, the Perth Group never moved beyond the AIDS issue to question the existence of other viruses-a step that would have been a natural progression. They should have started doing so at least by the early 2000s, when Lanka published his short article challenging the existence of several pathogenic viruses. They had twenty years to do it, yet they didn't. Personally, I began doing this less than a year after discovering the AIDS dissident movement in 2002. Thus, the Perth Group was most likely composed of agents. Very soon after the Perth Group appeared, we saw the arrival of Duesberg, who was clearly an agent. Then there was Kary Mullis-also an agent. That is a lot of agents. And, as if by coincidence, most of the well-known figures (aside from the masterminds) began dying off in the 2000s, right when the elite was orchestrating the end of the AIDS dissident movement. It is therefore highly probable that most of them were agents too, and were simply taken out of play.
Regarding the "no-virus" movement of 2020, I demonstrated that all its initiators were agents (in a paper deleted by Google but available on the "big-lies" site, thanks to him). For instance, Mike Yeadon-formerly a vice president of Pfizer's respiratory disease division-has now joined the movement. Just look at that.
As for abiotic oil, the bulk of the work comes from Russian scientists. Yet, it is obvious that the USSR was just as much under the elite's control as the rest of the world. Therefore, if the elite allowed Russian scientists to develop this theory, it means they wanted it to spread later on. Before that, the theory originated with various thoroughly mainstream scientists from the 19th and early 20th centuries-who were, inevitably, agents themselves. Furthermore, the *Egalité et Réconciliation* website, founded by Alain Soral (a French agent of influence), promoted an author who published a book on the subject in 2025. Thus, the theory is now being championed by agents of the system.
Regarding historical revisionism, I showed that the movement was entirely orchestrated by the elite. We also observe that the elite created the conditions for challenging the official narrative by deliberately introducing numerous inconsistencies and absurdities.
Regarding the existence of atomic bombs, it originated with unknown individuals on websites or forums. So, it could be ordinary people as well as agents. However, it is curious that the people who came up with such a brilliant idea quickly vanished without a trace. Normally, one would seek to keep such an idea alive. I am not referring to those who subsequently took up the theory (myself included); most of them are identifiable and have maintained their web pages. I am talking about the two or three original initiators of the movement. No one knows who they are.
Regarding "Recentism," it stems from Fomenko, who is clearly an agent of the system. He is a mathematician who teaches at prestigious Russian universities, and he was never dismissed from his posts after developing his Recentist theories. Moreover, he even received publicity from mainstream media outlets. Thus, the movement was clearly initiated by an agent. Similarly, in France, Rock Saüquere (another agent)-editor-in-chief of *Top Secret* magazine-championed the Recentist theory. So, having been initiated by an agent, the movement is championed by other agents.
As for the lunar expeditions, I am not entirely sure who originated the idea. However, in France, one of the first somewhat well-known pioneers was Philippe Lheureux in the late 1990s. And he immediately received publicity from the mainstream media. Of course, the intention was to mock him. But the rule among the elite is to give no publicity to a genuine dissident, because doing so might awaken people. Therefore, if the elite gave Lheureux publicity in the mass media, it was clearly because they wanted to spread conspirationism regarding the lunar expeditions.
Regarding evolution and dinosaurs, the criticism comes primarily from religious groups in the US. So, it's hard to say for sure. After all, it makes sense that people who believe humanity was created 6,000 years ago would reject the idea of evolution spanning billions of years. And since I'm not very familiar with that scene, I don't really know whether the movement's leading figures are operatives or not. They almost certainly are, but I don't have any specific information on the matter. However, as noted earlier, a closer look at the situation reveals that-much like with historical revisionism-the elite established conditions conducive to challenging the official theory. Indeed, when it comes to fossils, they could easily have created fake transitional species. That would have been child's play for the elite, and it would have complicated things for the creationists. Yet, they didn't do it. And if that is the case, it must be because they ultimately wanted the theory of evolution to be called into question.
As for false flags and the concept of "crisis actors", I recall first encountering this on the Judeo-critical site judicial-inc.biz (between 2005 and 2010), which has since shut down. It was the very first site to discuss this back in 2005. Since I frequented many conspiracy theory sites, I believe I would have known if others were pushing the same narrative in 2005. It was an extraordinary idea at the time. It has since been adopted by many people, but the identity of the person behind it remains unknown. And yet, Judeo-critical rhetoric has since spread everywhere-even to sites clearly run by the elite. So, the person could have easily relaunched his website without issue. But he didn't.
So, for some, we don't really know who's behind it. But, for quite a few of them, it was clearly introduced by the elite. And for these latter, they're generally the most explosive. It is also suspicious when the original sources are unknown; typically, pioneers would take pride in their work and want to be remembered as the first to raise the issue.
So there you have it: conspirationist knowledge was not discovered by the general public-or by geniuses who figured it all out on their own-at least not for the vast majority of it. It was revealed to the public by the elite. Otherwise, regarding most of the topics in question, everyone would still believe the official lie-myself included.
Now, as long as it was just a matter of a few minor conspiracies, one might have thought the elite were merely throwing a few bones to ensure there would be a "conspirationist camp" during World War III-one that would subsequently be swept away. But with the mounting pile of major revelations, it is becoming conceivable that the plan is not to eliminate conspirationists after the war, but rather to bring about a complete shift in the scientific paradigm.
And, of course, the question arises: what else are they hiding from us?
In this situation, genuine dissidents could gain publicity from the elite
If the goal is a paradigm shift, genuine dissidents might gain some recognition-or even a measure of fame. After all, even when honestly articulating a dissenting viewpoint-even on currently highly controversial topics-one ultimately remains within the matrix. Unless one realizes that these movements were initiated by the elite and that the elite want to change the paradigm, one is merely a "useful idiot". As a result, the elite could reintegrate some into the matrix and give them publicity, even very advanced dissidents. They won't turn them into superstars, but they might grant them a degree of notoriety-a sort of minor badge of merit.
On social media, this could translate to a jump from a few dozen views per article or video to tens of thousands.
However, a distinction must be made here between run-of-the-mill dissidents and those capable of evolving. Once they reach a certain-even very advanced-stage of questioning, "Level 1 and 2" dissidents (so to speak) are incapable of realizing they have been manipulated. Consequently, they cannot question the new paradigm, and thus cease to be a threat. "Level 4 and 5" dissidents, on the other hand, are capable of doing so; they can question everything. If the shift to the new paradigm happens too easily, or if something doesn't quite add up, it will strike them as suspicious. They therefore remain extremely dangerous to the official narrative.
The elite is perfectly capable of distinguishing between the two groups. As a result, some will be thrust into the spotlight, while others remain completely unknown. And, naturally, it is the elite's agents who will get the lion's share.
And naturally, if a conspirationist has already put forward "outside-the-box" theories of a high enough caliber to challenge the new paradigm-as I am doing here by revealing the elite's objectives-they will be blacklisted from the very start.
So, as far as I am concerned, it is certain that I will continue to receive no publicity from the elite. In fact, I have never received any of any kind. On the contrary, search engines yield very few results, even when I search for the site's exact name or quote my pseudonym (enclosed in quotation marks or with a plus sign in front). In the last ten years, perhaps only fifteen people have cited my blog. Initially, my theories might still have been incorporated into the new paradigm. However, the elite likely suspected that I could challenge it. Consequently, the directive from the start was to avoid mentioning me at all costs. And this will be the case for any dissident demonstrating such capabilities. And that's normal. They aren't going to favor people who could be detrimental to them.
In any case, if the elite ensures that today's conspiracy theories become tomorrow's truth, the future looks bright for conspirationists. Our theories will prove true, and we will be the cool crowd at the start of the next cycle. However, since everything will be under control, we mustn't go too far. We mustn't claim that things are continuing as before-that we remain under the elite's thumb. Anyone who does that won't be cool; he will once again be dismissed as a nutcase, a paranoid, someone taking conspirationism too far. Instead, we will have to say that the elite has been defeated and that all is well in this brave new world.
This also means that everything currently considered extreme conspiracy theory by the mainstream media and the general public will gradually make its way into the mainstream and replace the current official narrative. That is why, for instance, we see a Kennedy-who positions himself as more or less critical of certain vaccines-heading the US Department of Health. Under normal circumstances, it would be impossible for a skeptic to end up leading that department. Yet, within the context of the project in question, it makes perfect sense.
All this implies that today's right-thinking conformists must prepare to see their entire intellectual worldview called into question. They will gradually witness conspirationists gaining the upper hand-a process that will be deeply painful for them. That said, many will claim they never believed the official narratives in the first place; a significant number of them are true weather vanes who simply shift with the prevailing wind.
Miscellaneous reflections
We have a sign that the elite is trying to bring back the Christian religion in force in France with its promotion on the Cnews television channel for some time now (which many in the French conspiracy world call Cjews). This is particularly apparent in the program "En quête d'esprit" ("In Search of Spirit"), which has aired every Sunday between 1:00 PM and 2:00 PM since May 2020, with a repeat broadcast on Sunday evenings at 9:00 PM.
To provide some context for non-French readers: CNews is a relatively new, right-wing channel that promotes the idea of an alliance between Jews and French nationalists. It is both pro-French nationalism and pro-Israel. By the way, many CNews journalists are Jewish. The channel is, of course, controlled by the elite.
It's true that it's very anecdotal. It's just one show on a single television channel in a single Western country. We would need more evidence of this kind. Yet, I believe it is significant. It is significant because such a thing makes no sense in a secular, almost entirely atheist France. Nor does it make sense on a pro-Israeli channel staffed by many Jewish journalists. Furthermore, there is no reason for the elite to do something like this unless they intend to revive the Christian religion.
Incidentally, this is another point that contradicts the notion that Jews are the masters of the world. Of course, one might argue that Jews seek to use Europeans to fight wars on their behalf-a topic I have discussed on this blog-and that, in this context, Christians could assist them against Muslims. However, Jewish leaders could easily rely on nationalists for that task; they have absolutely no need for Christians to do it.
Especially since, in anti-Jewish rhetoric, Jews are supposed to be the mortal enemies of Christians and to have sworn their destruction. Logically, then, Jewish leaders would never promote Christianity on a channel they control. However, if they aren't at the very top of the pyramid-and if things are actually the way I think they are-then it makes perfect sense.
Now, we could go down to a slightly lower level of conspirationism and say that the Jews are indeed the masters of the world, but that Vincent Bolloré, the owner of Cnews, is a Christian and is not beholden to the Jews. That would explain the presence of this program for Christians.
However, if Jewish leaders are indeed the masters of the world, then a truly independent Christian could never have taken control of a television channel. A Christian would have been nothing more than a front for Jewish leaders-and thus not independent. Consequently, broadcasting a program that promotes the Christian religion would inevitably have been a decision made by Jewish leaders. This brings us back to the contradiction mentioned earlier: Jewish leaders have no need to promote the Christian religion, which they are supposed to loathe. Promoting nationalism is quite sufficient to achieve their objectives.
We have seen that a figure like Alain Soral-who is an agent-has at times promoted the "New Chronology" theory, critiques of the theory of evolution, the abiotic oil theory, and other similar ideas. On the face of it, it is strange for him to discuss theories rooted in a far more extreme brand of conspirationism than his own. He ought to dismiss them as nonsense peddled by unhinged conspiracy theorists, or as theories floated by "the System" to steer people away from "reasonable" conspirationism. But, if the situation is indeed as I describe in this article, then it makes perfect sense: he is paving the way for the paradigm shift.
In a previous article, I discussed the coming of the Jewish Messiah-a figure who ought to be recognized as the Messiah in the Christian faith as well. From this perspective, the return of the Christian religion will be a very useful prerequisite for having naive people ready to swallow all the lies that will be served to them on this subject.
Regarding this possible return of Christianity, it is possible that the elite will use some of the white people who converted to Islam before and during World War III to gain followers. Once the Islamists are defeated, the elite needs only offer them conversion to Christianity to gain a large number of deeply devout followers. Since these individuals are impressionable-gravitating toward whichever trend is dominant at the time-it would be easy to convince them that they had been manipulated by Muslims and that their true faith is Christianity. Moreover, as recent converts, they would likely display even greater zeal.
While writing this article, I came across a news item from BFMTV dated August 9, 2026, with the headline: "US Secretary of Defense shares video calling for an end to women's right to vote." It seems mind-blowing at first glance, yet it makes perfect sense given what we have just seen.
One might assume that other sciences will also be called into question. For instance, I haven't seen much of this sort regarding geology so far; however, it would be logical for it to be challenged, given its connection to the theory of evolution. We should therefore expect new theories to emerge in that field, as well as in others.
Appendix on Lanka
As I mentioned earlier, it is true that Stefan Lanka was active around the same time as me-in the early 2000s. The thing is, he is clearly an agent.
The mere fact that he received publicity from mainstream newspapers regarding his lawsuit over the prize for proving the isolation of the measles virus (2014) was a clear indication of that. Had he been an ordinary person, he wouldn't have received any coverage at all; no newspaper would have mentioned him. Because the elite's strategy in such cases-assuming the person is a genuine dissident-is to simply not talk about them. That is infinitely more effective than speaking about them negatively.
Furthermore, Lanka teamed up with Kaufman and Cowan in 2020 to give lectures with them. In fact, the real issue is that Kaufman and Cowan associated themselves with Lanka. Had he been a genuine dissident, they wouldn't have done so. Why would they promote a genuine dissident when they could have easily operated on their own or with other agents? Therefore, the fact that they did so implies that he, too, must have been an agent.
In addition, he adopted Ryke Hamer's theories that almost all diseases result from psychological problems, which is ridiculous. Hamer, incidentally, was clearly an agent himself.
Furthermore, since at least 2020, he has been surreptitiously reintroducing the concept of viruses via bacterial phages-much like Kaufman and Cowan did with exosomes. He considers the existence of this type of virus to be proven. Moreover, he maintains that cells are composed partly of bacteria. This implies that, in his theory, bacterial phages are also cellular phages. Consequently, they are essentially the same thing as viruses, simply under a different name. One need only introduce the notion that they can become pathogenic and that this pathogenicity can be transmitted to arrive at the official viral theory-just rebranded.
That runs counter to the idea of a paradigm shift. If they reintroduce the concept of viruses behind their ideas of bacteriophages and exosomes, it implies that the plan-at least in the field of medicine-would not be a paradigm shift, but rather a continuation of the same contagious disease scam. And since a paradigm shift in medicine is crucial to supporting the shift in the rest of science, that would call into question my hypothesis regarding a scientific paradigm shift.
However, it is possible that Lanka-like Kaufman and Cowan-are merely intermediate figures in the evolution toward the new paradigm, destined to be challenged in turn by more advanced dissidents. Perhaps that is why the elite chose two Jews (Kaufman and Cowan) to launch the "no-virus" movement of 2020. With anti-Semitism on the rise, it will be easier to do. Especially since these figures are controversial for other reasons as well. Why did the elite ensure that controversial figures were involved if the goal was to impose their ideas? It may be to better position them to be labeled as "controlled opposition" later on, thereby clearing the way for more radical dissidents.
So, before 2020, apart from myself, there were only operatives championing the "no-virus" idea. I am the only one who defended this concept as early as 2003 or 2004 and produced a significant body of analysis on the subject. Yet, naturally, as a true dissident, I never received any publicity whatsoever-quite the opposite. As mentioned above, this is normal behavior from the elite. They aren't going to promote an enemy. So, if an agent (Stefan Lanka) championed this idea before 2020, and if-from 2020 onwards-the idea was launched solely by agents, subsequently championed primarily by agents, and received massive publicity within conspiracy circles, it implies that the elite wants it to spread.
Regarding the timeline of the "no-virus" movement, it is true that Lanka was well-known within medical dissident circles. However, until the 2010s, he was primarily known as an AIDS dissident. His 2001 paper arguing that several pathogenic viruses-or indeed most of them-do not exist received virtually no attention during the 2000s. Even when the topic was raised on the two main AIDS dissident forums (Aids Myth Exposed and Sidasante), the reaction was rather lukewarm. Had the elite wanted to promote such ideas back then, they would have deployed agents to ensure the concept received a rapturous reception. The elite only began promoting Lanka from 2014 onwards. That was the year the trial concerning the isolation of the measles virus took place. At that point, the elite gave him a certain amount of publicity by ensuring the mainstream press covered the story. However, the case focused on challenging the existence of just one pathogenic virus, which naturally limited its scope. Of course, Lanka did discuss other viruses as well, but those claims were not highlighted at all; the elite gave him practically no publicity regarding them. Thus, it was truly in 2020 that the "no-virus" movement exploded.
Hexzane527
September 27 2026
Aucun commentaire:
Enregistrer un commentaire