Or you can mail donations to Henry Shivley at P.O. Box 964, Chiloquin, OR 97624

Experiments in Deceit

New York Times, May 7, 1995

LOUIS PASTEUR embodies a most rare image, the scientist as hero. We have been told often not only of the brilliance and originality of his research, but also of its enormous practical benefits, like his cure for rabies. When he died in 1895, his funeral was designated a national event and the French state paid the bill. Raymond Poincare, a future president, proclaimed: “Adieu, dear and illustrious master! Science, which you have so grandly served — sovereign and immortal science, become more sovereign still through you — will transmit to the most distant ages the indelible imprint of your genius.”

These days such public sentiments about science are almost inconceivable. The atomic bomb, eugenics and fraud have all helped to dim the luster of science. Scientists are portrayed more as manipulators than as heroes.

In “The Private Science of Louis Pasteur,” Gerald L. Geison, a historian at Princeton University, has explored 100 of Pasteur’s laboratory notebooks, now held in the National Library in Paris, which record 40 years of scientific activity and which were made available to researchers only about 20 years ago. Mr. Geison specifically disclaims any intention to deny Pasteur’s greatness as a scientist, but to illuminate the scientific process, he sets out to expose some serious discrepancies between what Pasteur published and said in public and what is recorded in the notebooks.

Even with the notebooks as his guide, Mr. Geison is unable to provide a satisfactory explanation of how Pasteur made his first great discovery, in a study of isomers — different chemical compounds that have exactly the same chemical formula. Chemists thought they could always be distinguished through other physical properties, but in 1844 two isomers, forms of tartaric acid, were found not only to have the same chemical formula but to be identical even in “the nature, number, arrangement and distances” of their atoms. Chemistry, as a science, was in trouble. Then, in 1848, Pasteur demonstrated that when these acids are crystallized, their crystals’ faces are mirror images of one another and thus rotate polarized light in opposite directions. His demonstration of this structural difference, and his method of doing it, have borne abundant fruit in many branches of modern science. But his procedures in this experiment puzzle Mr. Geison, who talks of scientists constructing reality, not just interpreting facts. Well, that is at the heart of scientific creativity: Pasteur’s discovery depended on exceptional skills as an observer, experimentalist and theoretician.

On the question of spontaneous generation — can nonliving matter spontaneously organize itself into living matter? — Pasteur claimed the issue could be decided on facts alone. However, as Mr. Geison persuasively explains, he never did believe in spontaneous generation, and when his own experiments gave the wrong result he always resorted to an alternative explanation.

When we come to anthrax and rabies, the notebooks rewrite history. In 1881, Pasteur staged a public trial of an anthrax vaccine for sheep. He was triumphant, the more so since the vaccine was not well researched, as he admitted. His public description of the vaccine implied that it was prepared by his general method of using oxygen to attenuate the virulence of the anthrax bacillus, thus making it suitable for vaccine. In fact, the method he used was similar to that of a competitor. He was deceptive because he wanted both priority and recognition. He needed both — to find support for his work, and for personal gratification. As it turned out, his oxygen method later proved very successful.

His fascination with rabies, and with attempts to find a vaccine, was natural. As a child in the Jura Mountains, he had heard victims of attacks by rabid wolves screaming in agony as their wounds were cauterized with a red-hot iron. Proving a vaccine presented a problem: as he himself said, experimenting with animals was allowed, doing it with people was a crime. He was not medically trained. Nevertheless, in 1885 he used his vaccine in complete secrecy on two patients with rabies: a man who recovered and a child who died. In both cases doctors made the injections. The only records of these events are in the notebooks and correspondence. There is no question he was experimenting on humans, even before he had any success in curing the disease in animals.

Next a boy bitten by a rabid dog was brought to him; a doctor said the boy, Joseph Meister, faced certain death. Pasteur treated him, and he survived. Three months later he treated another victim, who also lived. He then announced that he had discovered a treatment for rabies in humans, based on experiments on dogs, and forestalled ethical criticisms by claiming that in his experiments he had “rendered a large number of dogs refractory after they had been bitten.”

Pasteur lied. As the notebooks show, only some 30 dogs had been studied, and a third of them had succumbed to rabies. Worse still, not one of them was treated by the method used on Meister. The question of just what made Pasteur choose the particular treatment is quite complex, but it involved a change of mind about how immunity to rabies developed. The notebooks do not reveal his thinking. Mr. Geison speaks of “a remarkable flexibility of mind in the now aging Pasteur.” But the treatment worked, and over the next 10 years some 20,000 people were treated by Pasteur’s method.

Pasteur is not attractive: aloof, gruff, authoritarian, secretive, competitive, a ruthless opponent. That, from the point of view of his science, is irrelevant. His misconduct about anthrax and rabies is much more reprehensible, though as regards rabies, perhaps he could defend himself in terms of the terrible problem of coming face to face with a dying child he thought he could help.

THIS book provides a fascinating and detailed account of much of Pasteur’s life and of French science in the last century. But its aim is wider. Mr. Geison thinks the episodes he examines have a contemporary message: Science, like any other form of culture, relies on rhetoric; objective, value-free science may be a myth. In fact, no matter how brilliant a scientist’s rhetoric, in the long run the truth will out. Social factors influence the course of science; the outcome is determined by nature.

What this life of Pasteur shows is how complex, hard and imaginative scientific discovery is, and that it requires a variety of skills rarely found in one person. Mr. Geison has gone some way to deconstruct the myth of Pasteur and the belief that all of his science is pure and beautiful, but most of Pasteur’s beautiful science still shines brightly. Dishonesty is the antithesis of the scientific endeavor; yet we can be grateful to Pasteur in spite of his misdemeanors.

New York Times

This entry was posted in News. Bookmark the permalink.
763

4 Responses to Experiments in Deceit

  1. Patrick Jordan says:

    Wow! NYT printing even half a truth? Who would have imagined? I like to call him Looney Louey. Lettuce deconstruct the propaganda above:
    Geison did what Edgar March Crookshank did to Jenner in 1889. Jenner was found by his own work to be a complete fraud. Edgar lost his job over it. I wonder if Geison will keep his?
    The writeup is totally vague about the details on optical isomers and spontaneous generation. I experienced spontaneous combustion once, thank god there was some gasoline handy to douse myself with.
    We see from the anthrax scenario that Looney Louey was a fraud and cheat.
    Rabies is an even more curious situation. If there were any diseases that could be candidates for ‘vaccines’ then Rabies would be at the bottom of the list despite Louey’s childhood trauma related to it. The incidence of rabies was so low as to make it statistically invalid as a public health threat. Add to that the ABJECT LIE OF ATTENUATION and we get into the depth of the fraud of the man. To CROSS SPECIAL BARRIERS is always to AMPLIFY the virulence of a disease. But Looney Louey FOUGHT to get it from dogs into rabbits and other woodland creatures meaning that it didn’t naturally ‘take’ so he had to force it past special barriers meaning he amplified it not attenuated it. Maybe in France everything is Opposite Day.
    Next we see that he was a criminal because he did unauthorized experiments. But the whole tone of the NYT article is: The ends justify the means look at what a wonderful legacy this criminal fraud liar left us.
    Oh, but we ain’t done. You see in English jurisiprudence: Fraud and Murder have no statutes of limitations. This means that when he killed that kid with his FAILED EXPERIMENT then he and his accomplices are now guilty of a capitol crime. In fact, those who promote his work all the way into the future are accessories after the fact.

    Examine the deceit in the language:
    “But the treatment worked, and over the next 10 years some 20,000 people were treated by Pasteur’s method.”
    contrasted with:
    “Pasteur lied. As the notebooks show, only some 30 dogs had been studied, and a third of them had succumbed to rabies.”

    So, if he lied about a 33% kill ratio in the fictitious dogs then how many of the fictitious people were killed by his ‘successful’ method? One turd of 20,000 is 6,666 people possibly died from his successful vaccine!

    “Dishonesty is the antithesis of the scientific endeavor; yet we can be grateful to Pasteur in spite of his misdemeanors.”

    Dishonesty = Fah King lies. Antithesis? Not even a consideration in science that is not whored out for money like Looney Louey was. Misdemeanors? That’s like when you spit on the sidewalk. He was a MURDEROUS LYING FRAUD of which there is no statue of limitations. Dig his rotting husk out of the ground, try it for crimes and then burn him to ash and put him in a toxic waste storage facility. And while you’re at it put on notice those who excuse his crimes they they are part of the conspiracy.

  2. Patrick Jordan says:

    With apologies if there are restrictions on the use of foul language. I sent the link to this article to my email list. I then sent the material below to my email list when I discovered one of the most damning exposes in clincal science ever.

    Frankly, friends I do not know where this can end. The Red Hens and I have uncovered so many conspiracies and occultations that it has rendered my entire schooling invalid. Everything I thought I knew about science has been revoked and now we rebuild from the ashes all the while being vigilant for that tiny worm from which the phoenix might rise so we can kill the damned worm as well.

    So, here’s how it goes:
    The Pasteur thing came out in the NYTimes that I obliterated in a few paragraphs. Because Looney Louey was such a nutjob I went a seeking to see what his religion was. Turns out he was reported to be Catholic. Yet from that investigation I came across this quote that chilled me to the bone because as I teach in Continuum ALL FACTS ARE RELATED TO ALL OTHER FACTS. The trick is to keep them circulating in your mud pellet at the same time so that they bang together.

    BANG!

    https://answersingenesis.org/origin-of-life/louis-pasteurs-views-on-creation-evolution-germs/
    “Pasteur had the uncanny ability to combine theoretical, operational, and applied science—the mark of a truly gifted scientist. Pasteur understood the variability of microbes and how he could apply this principle in vaccine preparation. For example, he noticed that Bacillus anthracis cultures sometimes lose their pathogenic ability when heated, and then retain this modified, nonvirulent, or “attenuated” trait through many generations. He applied this concept to vaccinate dozens of sheep that would have otherwise died at a critical time in France. His understanding of this natural variation was also successfully applied in developing vaccines for chicken cholera and rabies.”

    Cooking. Just like what they did to polio and formaldehyde soup. Except if you have an enormous brain and those facts are bubbling from the bottom to the top then the savor of the flavor mixes with:

    Survival of Escherichia coli under lethal heat stress by L-form conversion

    http://www.ijbs.com/v06p0303.htm
    Transition of bacteria to cell wall deficient L-forms in response to stress factors has been assumed as a potential mechanism for survival of microbes under unfavorable conditions. In this article, we provide evidence of paradoxal survival through L-form conversion of E. coli high cell density population after lethal treatments (boiling or autoclaving). Light and transmission electron microscopy demonstrated conversion from classical rod to polymorphic L-form shape morphology and atypical growths of E. coli. Microcrystal formations observed at this stage were interpreted as being closely linked to the processes of L-form conversion and probably involved in the general phenomenon of protection against lethal environment.

    I sent that out to the list Sat, Sep 29, 2018 at 6:40 AM

    please god someone tell me that they remember that article. It feels so lonely to be able to see the entire fractal but not have anyone tell me that they see the ENTIRE picture as well. Yet these two seemingly unrelated ‘facts’ are part of something so big that I will probably not need to buy toilet paper for years to come.

    What does it mean?
    Well, that is what I would hope that anyone on this list might be able to tell me by now:

    IF E.coli simply goes L-form = cell wall deficient = undefuckingstructable by simple application of HEAT, then what does that say of ‘attentuated’ COOKED bacteria in VACCINES?

    It means that we and food animals since the time of Pasteur have been shot up with stealth organism that accounts for the irresolvable sickness of the entire planet. This idea is so big it dwarfs all of mainstream and alterNOTive medicine. The ‘GIFT’ of Looney Louey Pasteur was to EMBED Cell Wall Deficient organisms in a world population in a way that would make Lida Mattman cough up a lung.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WozrCFW0mRM

    Where do you get this kind of synthesis? NO WHERE except from Patrick Jordan and the Little Red Hens. Everyone else is there to deceive you.

    • mary in TX says:

      ‘Frankly, friends I do not know where this can end. The Red Hens and I have uncovered so many conspiracies and occultations that it has rendered my entire schooling invalid. Everything I thought I knew about science has been revoked and now we rebuild from the ashes all the while being vigilant for that tiny worm from which the phoenix might rise so we can kill the damned worm as well.’

      In my very first conversation with Dr. Rebecca Carley way back in 2009 I recall her stating emphatically “everything you have ever been taught is a lie”…………that was the first lesson of my REAL education and it is why I support you Patrick and Henry….( bam…Patrick Henry)…two of a very few Truth seekers….

      • Patrick Jordan says:

        Give me Libation or give me Dearth!

        I remember the feeling of confusion and betrayal when I learned that the thoracic duct of the lymphatic system drained into the heart but not the liver. I couldn’t have invented that association myself, it had to have come from somewhere, yet that was before the Nelson Mendella Effect was a psyop. Over the past 18 years everything that I had been TAUGHT for half a century has been shown to be PURPOSEFULLY FALSE so it is like standing on a wobble board in the dark in a hurricaine. Not to worry, I know it is just best to hit the deck and hug the ground. Even the Buddha touched the ea-rth for support when battling the Mara.

        My suggestion to anyone who has not had their mud pellets polluted by formal education is to trust your own experience. A musician friend told a story about a trumpeter for an orchestra who wanted to move up to the first chair position. He auditioned multiple times but was always turned down. He finally confronted the conductor to ask why. The conductor said that his fingering was wrong so he could never achieve his goal. The trumpeter said that he would take lessons and re-learn the proper fingering. The conductor said that the trumpeter had been playing wrong so long that the muscle memory would not let him re-train his brain. The Red Hens and I will provide that foundation so that successive generations will never have to face that. Problem is: people have to start now to teach their kids the foundation. They also have to secure our collective knowledge where it cannot be destroyed or changed at a whim like a Wicked Peed On Us page. Pasteur has just been Pasteurized!

        Love you, Mary.

Leave a Reply