In order to understand the smallest things, Bent, someone often have
to understand the biggest things first.

Here is what I have figured out:

The Axioms of Scientology are correct. Nobody created us, the thetans,
the spirits, the souls, we always existed. Even people that believe
only in evolution say that there was someting at the beginning, a
energy, that they can't explain. The energy is us, the thetans.

We existed in harmony and played in the beginning spiritual games,
till some wanted different kinds of games. The physicial universum was
postulated and created. I don't believe that many thetans created the
universe. I tell you also why: science says that the basic elements of
everything in the physical universe is made out of strings, hangs on
strings. Even gravity is explained that way. In other words: the
universe is elegant as if the creator was a violin player and if many
different creators would have created it, it would should show
different handwrittings.

The physical universe was now standing. The human body is also a
creation of the creator, but not the spirits, the souls, the thetans,
as they always existed.

I think in the beginning thetans took the bodies available and a while
everything was alright. We must have a fine civilization and played
good games, till some of the thetans did not stick to any rules. They
sort of hit others over the heads and became bad and perverted rather
quickly. They would not listed to not do what they don't want to be
done to themselves. Those perverted thetans made it to their game to
harm, kill and pervert the other thetans that did not want to play
foul.

Those thetans did nothing during the centuries than trying to control
and pervert others. They became later psychiatrists as they are known
wanting to control others. A thetan does most of the time the same
thing he did before. He is sort of picking up what the left in his
other life behind. If you were a harmless artist, you will be one
again, and if a thetan is a suppressive beast, he will continue his
crime spree. If he once tried to get in the mind of people and
controlled them, he will do so again. I am talking about those thetans
that choose to be esp. psychs.

I don't think that the story of Adam and Eve played here on earth but
on another planet. I am also convinced that the creator's nearest and
dearest never turned on him or themselves. But there was the snake,
remember? Doctors have the snake in their symbol, which should make
you think. The snake had a human body, and likely there were several
of them, people with snaky characters, trying to prey on the thetans
that stayed good and seduced them to drugs. It was not an apple.

Many people followed the lead of the snake and drugs, and the rest is
history. Ethics and moral was forgotten by many thetans. Those that
got bad the quickest in the beginning were those that seduced the
others to become bad. They never changed their ways. They stayed bad.
In other words; nothing on this earth committed by humans should
surprise you.

I don't believe that the creator who created the universe created
animals and germs. Basically you know him and that he would never
expect a thetan to be reduced to a life time as an animal.

How did they come into existance? Bad people, the snakes, the psychs
made experiments with thetans and bodies and created this kind of life
forms. No thetan in the beginning wanted to be a dog, a pig or a
virus. The least they wanted was a human body. Somebody tampered with
human bodies and degraded thetans and they evolved into animals.

What about the germs? The snakes, suppressive thetans (psychs) made
more and more experiments with thetans. You can glue them together (as
mentioned in OT III) but you can also split them. A thetan exist out
of a tiny bit of material. He can be measured and seen. One can trap a
thetan. Just imagine somebody would do that to one and explode him
over and over in pieces and implant him to dissolve, to not more
exist, to split.  The thetan still would be, as he can't be killed,
but he could be disolved as big being and the parts of him would
continue to live, picking up low life forms as bodies of animals and
even bacteria. However, as the germ, virus or bacteria is basically a
piece of us, he can be manipulated with the same methods as a human
being.

What I write should be validated science, independently and
extensively
researched all over the planet. I don't claim to be all knowing, but
what I present is not totally erroneous.

I never said so.

If you disagree at some point, you hope you have some information to
back that up, and not just a feeling.

Hey, no problem. Just ask miracles of me. I am used to it. The
universities are sleeping (have not yet officially tailed a thetan
without body through an UV camera, the easiest thing on earth) but I,
without any cash and resources, have to bring the scientific proof!

You do have some misconceptions about germs, and what they are able to
do. And you seeing them as instrument of your enemy, it makes you
focus
on the wrong things. In other words, what you are fighting/fearing is
not real.

That is completely false, Bent.

I am well aware of that I can't just convince of that. And even
suggesting it, would make you think I am controlled by the enemy to
throw you off track.
I would suggest you talk to someone who have studied medicine, biology
or something, to confirm, clarify or perhaps correct my ramblings. I
understand from other posts you have made, that you are very critical
towards any "med. folks", so that might pose a problem.

They know so little. How often have I heard that they have no answer
to questions that I tried to have answered!

If nothing else I hope you enjoy the reading.

Sure, what is nicer than reading about germs. :)

germs,

My bad english I think.

Your English is not bad.

What I mean is, a virus would have no meaning,
no purpose, if there was no cells in its enviroment.

Correct, but germs, spores and bacteria are also dangerous.

As I wrote in another post :
...a virus is not a living machine. They are at best a fraction of a
subcomponent, that is needed to assembly a cell...

But that information is contrary to many of the links that you
provided. The links say that viruses LIVE within a cell but can't
survive without one. I am saying: like a fish, who can't survive on
land, but nevertheless he is an animal, just like the virus in one.

Think of computer viruses. The code of computer virus is the same as
other programs(genetic code). Outside the computer (cell), the virus
does nothing. It can not  spread or do any harm at all. Once inside a
computer, and loaded into the central processing unit, it can take
over
the computer, copy itself onto the harddrive, try to spread through
the
internet, or just sit there and wait.

I bet there are not just computer viruses, but real and remote
controlled germs that sabotage software and hardware of computers.

See also :
http://www.people.ku.edu/~jbrown/virus.html

before it

own.

Are we talking past eachother?

You said :
<quote>
It would be better if you would refer to a germ or bacteria or virus
and not the cell.
<end quote>

I said :
<quote>
I use the term "Cell" because the term Germ would include viruses,
which
is not "living", as Zinj also notes.
<end quote>

Joe Lynn, the Zinji is at fault here. :) If he would have not loaded
down his anti-Scientology propaganda in this thread but rather stayed
on the subject germs, there would me no confusion. He is also wrong
that a virus is no living thing.

living

they

Some cells can eat other cells (our immunesystem has macrophages,
which
can eat/kill invading bacterias).

Viruses cannot eat anything, since it is just a piece of RNA or DNA,
which is just a big molecular structure.

They are living creatures that invade the cells but who says that they
don't eat anything? However, whatever they do, it is nasty for us
humans as they make us sick. I made the point that they can remote
controlled attack humans. If they eat or do it otherwise is not that
important, important is only to know that they do it.

See:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA

What or how bacterias "eat" is not an easy task to explain. Some
nutrients simply drift through channels in the cellwall, others is
actively "dragged" into the cell. What those nutrients are differs
greatly. In general, the digesting would involve a series of chemical
and/or mechanical processes.

Or biological processes.
Here you have it: animals are dragging food in the cell.

Cells divide, split into two, make a copy of itself, but dont lay
eggs.
Some cells (certain bacteria, fungi) produce spores (kinda baby cell)

Disgusting, and those sexual activities on and in our bodies. They
should get a room! :)

when starved and die, or otherwise in an adverse enviroment. Spores
can
stay dorment for years, until in a suitable enviroment come to life.

I bet there are animals that are just like that.

See also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bacteria

That might be all correct, and it confirms that they are like animals,
like insects, like lies, fleas, just smaller.

Regarding my conclusions. I am "one of those guys" who have looked at
cells in a microscope. I didn't see a virus though, that would have
required a much more powerfull microscope than I had access to.
But having some knowledge of the atomic composition/assembly of
virus/DNA/RNA, and its function in a cell, I have a rough mental image
of the thing. I haven't studied germs professionally, but have had
courses in or read about cell physiology, human physiology, chemistry
and biophysics. It is a personal interest, to know just a little about
what goes on around and inside me. It doesn't make me an expert, but I
have a pretty good idea of how it all fits together, and a rough idea
about what is and not is possible.

I don't try to degrade your experience but you never tried to train
them do certain things, and I know it is possible with any living
thing. By the way, all flea circuses are not tricks.

biological

Viruses cannot be killed by antibiotics.
(biotic = of or relating to living organisms, virus is not regarded as
living)

But some of them can be killed with some kind of kind of antidote.

See also:
http://www.people.ku.edu/~jbrown/antibiotic.html
http://www.prodigy.nhs.uk/clinicalguidance/releasedguidance/webBrowser/pils/PL212.htm

It (the webpage) said
<quote>
Viruses cannot "live" on their own.
<end quote>

The meaning is (like the computer virus analogy) that it has no
function
when it is outside a cell.

I am very glad about that, as they do already enough harm in a cell of
a human body. But don't forget that bacteria and germs makes us also
sick and kill us. I just recently heard in the news that even stroke
and bacteria can be traced to bacterias doing their number on people.

Viruses are very good at "surviving", since they are not alive, they
can
 not as such die. Theoretically they have no expire date.

They are alive! I think that viruses can die down. If they would not,
mankind would no longer be, over run by them.

As far as I know, to "kill" a virus you would need to take it apart
into
smaller pieces.

That reminds me to what mindcontrollers do to thetans, although the
viruses need to be taken in pieces otherwise they take us into pieces
and to the grave.

Enzymes, extreeme heat and radiation can do that. Acids
or oxidants would probably also do the trick. There may be other ways.
Spores are also good survivors, because they don't need to feed in
that
state (like seeds), but do require some moisture.

Just like babies. They mainly need fluids. See? It all boils down to
animals.

And that is how you can train them, you make them fear, you take away
away their ideal survival grounds, if they don't attack the way you
want them to!

Yes, they do exists, and (some) do cause us trouble.

There is also friendly bacterias...
<quote from http://www.holistichorizons.com/hh102.htm>
Lactobacteria reside in the intestines and are known as "friendly" or
"beneficial" bacteria.
<end quote>

I doubt that they are always friendly and that they can't be perverted
into attackers. If we would not have to live in such a germ invested
pigstable as the unprotected surface of the earth, we would not need
"good" bacteria to get rid of the bad bacteria. We would have a clean,
happy, painfree and endless life without any of the critters.

Even dolphins and horses, usually friendly, can be trained to turn in
attackers. I was once attacked in Munich by two socalled peaceful but
remote controlled pigeons at the same time. No kidding.

The important thing to understand is, they have always been around.

Not always, not before the physical universe was created. And the
creator of the universe did not create them. The germs, viruses,
bacteria are the creation of bad people as explained before. There are
around since ever, the suppressive people, they tend to make the same
kind of experiences over and over again. They maybe have forgotten
that they did the same kind of things millions or billions of years
ago, they do it again and think it is new. (Creating and breeding and
distributing germs and viruses.)

They started it all, and subesequently where a part of the evolution,
and now naturally is a part of us.

Depends on what you call natural. If somebody would have not perverted
thetans to pick up such lifeforms, we would not have them. The only
living things would be plants and humans.

If you look at a human cell, and
compare it to a bacteria, there is a lot of similarities. And that is
no
coincidence. They have a common ancestor.

That is actually confirming that the germs are a part of us, the
thetans, as they have similarities to what we have. It is exactly what
I am saying, but you don't want to have the evil activities around
them true.

I'll get back to the remote control thing.

Not sure. They mention that DNA binds to the carbon nanotubes, and
separation by using a common laboratory trick. Makes me think of
DNA-fingerprinting. Then the trick would be electrophoresis. Works by
putting charged particles/molecules in an electric field. The charged
particles are then "dragged" in one direction. Direction and speed
depends on the charge and size of the particle.

I agree, it is not clear what Angela Belcher did, however, her
experiments with germs are certainly not the only once.

Note that they don't "control" the germs. They just pour them on, and
then they do *one* specifik thing only, after that they pour the next
substance on.

Alright, probably you just have a problem with the word "remote
controlled". What about germs that are deliberately bred in labs and
learn to do just one thing: attacking the human body in their specific
kind of one way but on a commando, words, numbers, noise or music,
something that they heard when they were bred. Some are bred to cause
Alzheimers, the other cancers, the other Parkinson's, the others, as
heart disease, the to clog our arteries?

I am convinced that germs attack upon secret commando, as strange
things happened on my own body. Anyway, I also remember somebody
telling me that one day, in a room without wind, that a postcard
started to stand up! My guess was that remote controlled germs were
carrying that thing around.

I think that the SEGNPMSS can even arrange mudslides, avalances, mines
to collapse and grounds upon which houses stand, by activating germs.

Electrophoresis, see :
http://www.life.uiuc.edu/molbio/geldigest/electro.html

About the electric field : Think of a plate. Pour some sand on it.
Tilt
the plate. You know have some particles (the sand) in a similar
gravitational field (instead of electrical field). The sand move, just
like charged particles would do in a electric field.

Yes, but why don't they do it with sand but bacteria? There is more to
it as they published!

Yes, any germ can be bred.
Germs can be altered by genetic manipulation, thus can be designed for
different purposes. According to the media, scientists seems be quite
good at gene-manipulation or genetic engineering. (I am referring to
news of genetically designed/altered food products, cloning, detection
of diseases by analysing DNA, ...)

True. And that is also why I suspect a lot more secret experiments and
activities by the doctors. That is why they can manipulate a germ also
in a remote controlled germ or virus.

And yes they can be distributed. Some easier than others. Viruses and
spores are the easiest to distribute. Bacterias is more difficult
because they need a suitable enviroment during transport. If kept cold
their metabolism (need for food) is kept low.

In the degree they attack me, they are good in surviving. There are
tons of bacteria on earth. A child carries around 1 1/2 pounds of
them. An adult has a larger body, I bet despite all the hygiene, he
got even more sticking on him.

Lifeform; yes.
Learn like other living things; I'll answer that in a while...

For example (I don't understand all mechanisms involved, but this
rough
description should be fairly accurate), normally Penicillin disrupts
or
atleast lowers the bacterias ability to grow (that is, expand its cell
wall/membrane). When it can't grow, it can't get big enough to split
into two. That way the bacteria won't reproduce/spread so fast (or
even
kill it), and gives the immune system time to prepare the defense and
destroy the bacterias. (http://www.cellsalive.com/pen.htm)

When bacterias becomes immune to some antibiotic, then it is by chance
rather than it becoming "smart". All cells produce enzymes for
different
purposes in its internal machinery. When bacterias reproduce, once in
a
while it mutates. This mutated bacteria might produce a new enzyme,
which just happens be able to cut/destroy/disable the penicillin. This
new bacteria is now immune to penicillin, and would thrive in an
enviroment with penicillin because it would not have to compete with
other bacterias.

There you have it, they become "smart", good at survival just like
animals as they are animals, just the smallest form of animals.

There is other kinds of antibiotics, which works differently. But in
general, small mutations *will*, given the time and opportunity, at
some
point produce an immune or stronger variant of the bacteria.
It is ...

... simple evolution. In an enviroment with high competition, any
advantage counts. When life is made eaiser for one certain bacteria,
that bacteria will prosper. It is not a matter of intelligence.

Low life form intelligence it is. Remember that they try to find
bacterias on other planets? If they find them, that is the proof of
life on other planets they say. They consider bacteria as life. They
will find them, as the earth is not the center of the universe, and
there were civilizations that once were on other planets ( certainly
includes Mars and other planets) and germs were bred also there. The
docs were always in the same line of pigish work to torture mankind.

Picture water running down a hill. The route it takes, is not any
route
at all, but is easiest route down the hill. If you change the terrain,
then the water will take a different route, again taking the easiest
route down. That doesn't make the water intelligent. The water might
erode the terrain, and suddenly take another route, or split into two
where the waterflow is proportionate to how easy the route is. That is
evolution, *not* intelligence.

Bent, that is not a good example to convince me of your theory. What
you described is me mechanic or gravity. What is up, must come down.
Water is an element not evolution and it is not a germ. Water does not
fight for survival. Although the creatures in it, including germs in
water do so.

When you say "Learn like other living things", its a matter of
interpretation and some philosophical standpoint.

If you mean "put two and two together" then no.
If you mean self-correction by "trial and error" then no.
If you mean "trial and error"-selection in inheritance then yes.

Strecthing the term "mind" a bit, one could say that one bacteria/cell
have a *unalterable* "reactive mind". Each time the bacteria split,
the
new just *might* have an slightly different "reactive mind". But it is
a
philosophical point of view, which does not translate to the physical
world.

I bet all a own that I can train them to do what I want and that
psychs, doctors, mindcontrollers did that to have a secret murder
tool.

Yes, life sometimes sucks. As I have mentioned earlier we humans have
a
quite good (realy amazing) immunesystem.

Dying in average of 70 years is not a good imune system. It is plain
stupidity. I am certain that people can stay forever young, forever
healthy and forever alive under best and germless conditions for them.

Take one bacteria. Bacterias can split into two, every 20 minutes
given
the right enviroment (plenty of food, ideal temperature, ...) This
doesn't sound much, but if you wait 24 hours, one bacteria will become
(2*2*2*2..[72 times]) 4.722.366.482.869.645.213.696 individual
bacterias.

They are good in surviving using you own example.

That is why I believe they can be used to trigger avalanches and
mudslides and mines to collapse, as they are so many of them.

This doesn't happens of course. For several reasons. Enormous
competition for food, their waste is toxic to them, unsuitable
enviroment (high temperature/ no moisture) and/or the enviroment is a
very deadly one (like our body).

As soon they die, the labs provide new germs and distribute them.

Our body is a haven for germs. If it would not be, people would not be
that sick and complain about the allergies.

From what bites me, they are a lot. And they are everywhere.  

The behave just like animals. The river in my neigborhood doesn't do
that, Bent, only the creatures in it.

In the human body, the enviroment is quite ideal for bacterias, good
temperature, plenty of food (when you are comfortable, they are too),
but fortunately our immunesystem kicks in. When taken by surprise, the
immunesystem needs time to identify the attacker, to produce
antibodies
or activating the macrophages. Once the vicious macrophages is
activated, the bacterias don't stand a chance.

Don't stand a chance? Those little critters kill us, Bent. They are in
charge for cancer, heart attacks, strokes, you name it. The humand
body does stand a chance against them, esp. not when mindcontrollers
stop "teasing" us only with sicknesses, but decide to make us lose the
body, in other words are killing is.

Sounds too good to be true, and it unfortunately is.

The reality it is so bad that it is true.

Some viruses and
bacterias does kill.

Says who? How many people are watching those creatures to be certain
that a socalled harmless thing suddenly turns into something not
harmless? From how the general "harmless" germs can pinch my skin,
they are not harmless. If they do this also inside my body, in the
organs, I need a miracle to survive.

Maybe in the future scientists will be able to
boost our immunesystem.

Don't count of them. They are blind and remote controlled.

For now eat properly, to keep the machinery running.

That is no false advice. ;)

Boost our immune system? We need a new way of living, away from germs,
radiactivty, toxins, poisons, UV beams, ect, as dying with 7o years
and aging is not a boosted immune system!

See also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macrophage
http://www.cellsalive.com/mac.htm
http://health.howstuffworks.com/immune-system.htm

Sure the bacterias and viruses can kill people, or just make people
sick.
You are right in the sense that, bacterias including the friendly ones
would go frenzy, multiplying endlessly, if given the chance. That is
what they do, multiply until there is no more food.

Because they are animals. Bacteria reproduce either asexually or
sexually. Disgusting isn't that? I don't want to have such animal
behavior on my skin or in my organs or in my blood.

But you see, some have a specific purpose in a complex system, and in
that system they behave properly (that is, their endless multiplying
and
death-rate is in balance with the rest of the system).

I heard that bacteria outweigh all mammals on earth. If that
information is correct, the eco system is not in balance!

Like the
digestive system, which wouldn't function properly without the right
bacterias.

Says who? SEGNPMSS controlled scientists, that say so often that
certain things are not yet figured out, etc.

That is what the uni "scientists" say, but I beg to differ. We could
do much much better without any germs, the "good", the bad and the
ugly.

see also:
http://www.holistichorizons.com/hh102.htm

(links below: beware, these guys are extreeme into health, their
description of the human digestive system seems valid, but I did not
find any site supporting their somewhat pessimistic view/claims on the
general condition of our intestines)
http://www.hps-online.com/colon-bacteria.htm
http://www.hps-online.com/fastcolebacwin1.htm

That is depressing. What do you find more depressing? Them or me
saying that the SEGNPMSS is killing us? :)

I hope I covered the learning thing, so about the remote control:...

Viruses is out of the question. They wouldn't be more controlable than
cube of sugar. Since its just one big molecular structure.

Why is that out of question? I bet the HIV virus was deliberately bred
in some SEGNPMSS lab and than injected in some of their monkeys and
let lose in Africa. The rest is history.

Viruses are not simple.

They are not simple to be killed. As they are kept alive with remote
control and I bet the effective medicine to kill them and heal that
disease is also SEGNPMSS controlled.

Even though some (and proteins in general) are
known to the extent that every single atom is accounted for, their
behavior is not fully understood.

This is what I just posted. Those "scientists" often just tell you the
same crap. They don't look in the right corner, but can't explain the
things in great extent,

However their nature and limitations
is to great extent known.
See:
http://www.stanford.edu/group/pandegroup/folding/science.html
http://anrvitamins.com/glossary/aminoac.html

A bacteria is wastly more complex, but in reality its just a bag of
chemical compounds, although in which probably millions of complex
chemical/mechanical reactions take place. All the reactions inside a
cell is not at all known, however all the physics involved *is* known,
so surprises like remote control is not gonna happen.
See also: http://ntri.tamuk.edu/cell/cell.html

They are wrong. Bacteria are a life form, a very very very very small
animal, like an insect, a fly, a flea, a louse, and they can be remote
controlled and are remote controlled. And I bet it is very very
simple.

You cannot compare a dog to a bacteria. Bacterias have no mechanism to
receive a "code" and associate it with a certain action.

Says who?

The influence
on bacterias, is mostly limited to what chemicals is present around it
(other things can be; heat may speed up chemical reactions (like fever
makes immunesystem work faster), radiation may break things (i.e. kill
it like in cancer therapy)).

In certain situtation, when they are restimulated to lose their lives,
their existance, they likely will attack. You just have to restimulate
that, make them feel that way, and they will attack you. Bet on it.

Whereas the dog has ears to hear a "code". Vibrations in the air
inside
the ear stimulates specialized cells to set of a signal through the
audiatory nerves, which is fed into the brain, where maybe a billion
cells is activated during the interpretation of the message.

It has nothing to do with ears. A thetan without body can hear. The
life times that pick up germ existance are parts of a thetan, they
hear too. Even flowers can hear. If you talk nice to them, they grow
better. Did you hear about that?

The same
code may be spoken by another person and interpreted in another way.
In contrast a specifik "code" (chemical/substance) would have a
predefined impact on the bacteria (like penicillin).

Not if you bred the bacteria under certain kind of codes. That is then
their code.

phew, kinda hard to explain.

Only if you ignore that they are animals and can be trained. :) I
never posted that you can train them to read the world classics, but
they can at least do some simple step, and that is being on remote
control in a certain way harmful to us often and finally to the degree
that they kill us.

Life in the bacterial level is a almost
purely chemical and a rather deterministic world. Remote control is
not
a part of that world.

Then you live on another planet than I do. :)  

Hope it made sense.
/Bent

Certain parts of your essay makes sense. I also did not say that all
you posted is wrong. However, it seems to me that you just don't want
to have corruption true.

However, the world is darker than you think thanks to suppressive
people, but there is a way out. If they are convicted, it is the end
of sickness, aging and dying as we know it. And that is actually very
very good news.

Barbara Schwarz