Questioning the unquestionable

Share this Article

CONTENT WARNING: This article requires an open mind. It contains material that may take you on a journey of discovery that could challenge some long-held beliefs. 

Are there viruses at all? 

I became aware of this heretical question during 2020, and I’ve followed the debate with interest ever since.

If you consume nothing but mainstream news you probably never heard there are people who actually doubt the existence of viruses, and even if you were aware, you would probably simply dismiss it as yet another tin-foil hat conspiracy theory. 

The thing is: once upon a time most people were convinced the sun revolved around the earth and anyone who said otherwise was ridiculed or worse – much worse. Today, it would be the other way round, and not just on Facebook, X, TikTok, or whatever the platform of your choice. 

So unless we keep an open mind to big questions, unless we allow big theories to be reconsidered and questioned, unless we don’t just faithfully and blindly repeat the mindless ‘follow the science’ mantra, unless we actually follow the scientific method and engage in rigorous scientific debate instead of muting those who don’t follow the herd, we end up turning science into a religion, and we end up making fools of ourselves, or worse, at least from the point of view of future generations.

If, say, the ‘big bang’ theory is challenged, it’s no big deal. It’s a question that is so far removed from our daily lives, it is allowed and even welcomed in mainstream media. Nothing much hinges on such a debate, and at worst it’s great click bait.

However, the question of whether or not viruses exist is a much hotter potato. Too many careers and livelihoods are at stake, and not just in big pharma. Even most people who question the official covid narrative are dismissive, or at least would rather not call into question the basic tenets of virology or germ theory in general. 

However, I find this debate not only fascinating but absolutely necessary. It’s science in action. Here we can observe in real time how a long-held theory is being seriously challenged, and just how difficult it is to swim against the current. Could we be witnessing the beginnings of a paradigm shift?

But what is this all about? Put very simply: those questioning the existence of viruses claim that the science behind virology is essentially smoke and mirrors; that the existence of viruses has never actually been proven using proper scientific methods; that all the alleged ‘evidence’ is based on shoddy experiments, computer-generated confabulations, and circular reasoning. Viruses don’t exist and are not the cause of disease.

For a long time those believing that viruses exist have simply ignored their challengers. But over recent years, the debate has intensified. 

Dr Sam Bailey threw down the gauntlet by publishing the Settling the virus debate statement on 14 July 2022. She and like-minded colleagues are challenging virologists to prove the existence of viruses through properly conducted, documented and monitored scientific experiments. In the same year, her husband Dr Mark Bailey published the essay A farewell to virology, which purports to debunk the discipline holus bolus. In 2023, to make the often rather technical essay more accessible, Steve Falconer produced a 3-part (6 hour+) documentary series (Part 1, Part 2, Part 3 out soon). Some other ‘heretics’ are Dr Thomas Cowan, who published The contagion myth in 2020, Dr Andrew Kaufman, Dr Christine Massey, Stefan Lanka, and the authors of Virus mania, Dr Claus Köhnlein and investigative journalist Torsten Engelbrecht. German entrepreneur Samuel Eckert established the Isolate Truth Fund, offering “€1,5 million for a virologist who presents scientific proof of the existence of a corona virus, including documented control experiments of all steps taken in the proof.”

At the moment, the ‘virus versus no virus’ debate is driven by the challengers, and the media is sure to sidestep the topic very carefully, at least until it is safe to discuss it without seriously ruffling some feathers. 

Personally, I’m in two minds. 

On the one hand, I can understand why the doubters want rigorous scientific proof that viruses exist, and the burden of proof lies squarely with the virologists. To my mind, the arguments of the doubters do make sense. 

I’m surprised that virologists react to being challenged by dismissing or ridiculing the doubters and by appeals to authority (eg at the beginning of this recent presentation), instead of seriously taking on the challenge and proving them wrong. Considering they are so convinced of their long-established theory, it should be possible for virologists to counter the specific arguments of the doubters, and to furnish solid evidence in accordance with sound scientific principles. 

On the other hand, could many thousands of virologists really fool themselves and the whole world by constructing and maintaining a whole make-believe scientific discipline for decades on end? Could this really be a massive case of group think?  

Hopefully there will be a serious, respectful, high-quality scientific debate in the years to come. But paradigm shifts are hard, and the stakes are extremely high.

Watch this space!

Share this article

Got something to add? Join the discussion and comment below.


  • Jörg Probst

    Jörg Probst is a Sydney-based Swiss-born polyglot Australian researcher and commentator with a passion for promoting critical and independent thinking. He studied philosophy, psychology and law, practised as a lawyer and now works as a legal researcher.

    View all posts
Follow Us

Join our Newsletter