Some of you may now rightly suspect that PCR was MADE to fabricate virus finding, not just USED to find fake viruses. PM's famous last words, "Evil doesn't leave anything to chance", and fabrications need a fabricator, Kary's the man!
OMG. I got blocked by most of them yesterday .. 😂🤯. WTF. They must be terrified. I was able to follow the SCIENCE & when I say I took barely any science in school or college, I am serious. I graduated with BA. No real science necessary 😂.
After finding Sabrina on Odyssey & all you guys .. it took me only 8 weeks to figure it out.
Your claim is that Kary Mullis created this technique intentionally for this purpose of it being misused to fabricate virus finding? I'd love to see your evidence of this.
I said "suspect...was made", suspect is not a definitive claim, and "fabricator" I mean fabricating the hype of the test with his persona and the virus pushing and etc that I have said in the Mullis Movie Star post. The real inventor Erlich may have invented the test for fabricating viruses either by intent or was funded to do this kind of work not knowing what is might be used for. This is standard Rockefeller Medicine Technique. Just guessing based on where we are now.
From Omar's article ref in that post it should be clear who did what:
Again, as admitted in even the mainstream articles, PCR was just an alleged "idea" that Mullis had ... the actual in-lab work was conducted by a team of technicians that didn’t include Mullis. That team was headed by Dr. Henry Erlich. So why does the Nobel Prize website still credit Mullis as the “inventor” - is it just because he originally had the idea? How could anyone prove that the idea was originally his, anyways?
Google defines inventor, as:
a person who invents, especially one who devises some new process, appliance, machine, or article; one who makes inventions.
But Mullis didn’t do any of that at all. He wasn’t involved in devising a new process, appliance, machine, etc. All he did was allegedly “have an idea” one night while driving and half-tripping on acid. What a rebel.
At best, we have some stories of him allegedly conducting some half-assed solo experiments in a lab at Cetus, but no real evidence of that work.
Furthermore, his idea wasn’t an original one either, it was specifically an idea on how to improve previous processes. But the main point here is that Mullis wasn’t involved in any inventing, lab-work or on-the-ground processes at all.
Since the early 1980s, Henry A. Erlich has been well-known in the forensic and medical communities for helping to pioneer the research and development of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR ) technique that ultimately led to a number of important forensic and clinical applications. As a result of the pioneering efforts of Erlich and his team of scientists, the first commercial PCR typing kit was developed specifically for forensic use.
My understanding is that while Mullis is credited with the conceptualization and invention of PCR, the Nobel Committee typically awards the prize to individuals who have made seminal contributions to a discovery or invention.
The actual work in the lab, including the refinement and application of PCR, often involves collaborative efforts by a team of scientists.
& this makes sense to me.
Henry Erlich is alive and well is he not? So if this was truly his invention then why not speak up? Or did he? or maybe it was "decided" that Mullis would be the front man. Maybe Mullis was the front man but also the patsy? & how is it that Mullis died just a couple of months before covid's theatrical debut? This seems like an interesting twist too.
But maybe none of this matters. I mean aren't we just getting caught in the weeds here, which in and of itself is a trap. I've just spend about 30 + minutes writing this response & to what end? It seems like there is a desire for "the people" "the peasants" to be focused on, and arguing about things that are inconsequential in the grand scheme. They want us to be distracted and divided. They want us to argue and they don't really care about what. Isn't this just playing into their hands?
I have no doubt that we are at war. 5th gen warfare style and if that is the case then we should be mindful to not get caught in unproductive or distracting arguments.
I fall for it less often now but here I am typing something that will not serve any purpose or be helpful to anyone.
What you say has a lot of truth, BUT, the more we learn the more it can trickle thru the population. Many people have woken up in the last 4 yrs, some had to have a bad shot reaction. That is the big picture and you are part of it. But back to the details,
1. The Nobel Committee has long been (probably from the start) a propaganda arm of the plutocracy (what exactly did Pres I'llBombYa do to get the prize besides destroy uncountable families in the Mid East?). Kary played his part very well over the years, his persona well-hid the fact that pcr is an act itself when it comes to viruses, it's ALL FAKERY. PCR as an idea was around many yrs, imagining it while driving high on LSD is not really seminal of much but it has the, "yeah, only a cool guy on a psychadelic could think of that, wow!" punch to it so people would believe it.
2. There is no proof Mullis died, but I don't know. He would have been inconvenient being around that is for sure, but operatives like JFK, RFK, Epstein, frequently just go underground or back stage lets say. If you are new to this idea, pls see my recent post, "Jackie the Car Jumper".
3. We don't know what Erlich's position is. Just a hard worker in the dark about what lurks around him? A Free Mason Mule of the Elite? A high level Peerage guy? Just another onion layer of the actors?
Knowing the TYPES of games that are played on us IS VERY IMPORTANT, the details of each game is less important as you rightly say, but you need to see some details or you wont get the big pic. Sometimes just break from this stuff and enjoy life is my advice.
There's no proof Kary Mullis died, we don't have a body to examine, and these elite persons are known to go underground frequently (see Mark Staycer), and for Kary is was a meaningful time to disappear. Kary was a darling of the blob, for his "marketing" of PCR in a sense, having fake fights with Fauci just like Rand Paul, he wouldn't go against pcr, anymore then he did for HIV, "the test can find anything"- but that doesn't mean there is no virus. He might be challenged to make statements on whether Covid virus existed, that would be inconvenient for the plan which he is part of so they wouldn't kill him. He's like the rest of the suspicious "deaths": Morrison, Lennon, JFK, RFK, Cobain, most pertinently the Challenger crew, it's a long list. Once you hear something over and over again from a million "official" sources you can stubbornly believe anything.
I'm not saying you're wrong or right but this is something you can't know for sure, which in and of itself is discrediting.
What I'm noticing is that the more time people spend down 'the rabbit hole' unraveling the lies, half truths, deceptions, manipulations, etc they tend to make everything a cloak and dagger, everything's a conspiracy.
I don't fully understand why it is so difficult for people to see that they liie especially with no real proof, fake scoence, foias that tell the same thing. No proof.
During covid randomly meeting doctors I would say you doctors wear blinders and I can prove it to you. Have you heard of vaers? No. It's a extremely underreporred government data base on vaccine injuries and deaths. Ect. Vaccines causes injures and death. No no, Vaccines saves lives. Right that's what you say and that's your experience. But this is the blinders part I'm talking about, all of these maamed and deaths are actually happening by the doctors and you doctors are incapable to admit it. That's right I won't because they save lives. I know you're going to say this and say that, as the injuries and deaths keep piling up. Blinders. Have a nice day.
But your list of David Martins, is astonishing. I say fine, a lab leak. If that's the case, it still has not been properly isolated, so when your testing for it, you're not really testing for it. And these are the smart people. Ok. Ok.
They must be trying to do something to get somewhere that I'm missing.
Smart gets tossed around easily these days. Like when your dog can find the hidden ball, he’s so smart! Critical thinking has been drummed out of education at all levels. Now people feel smart when they can regurgitate
Around 2010. From following Jon Rappoports Nomorefake news and reading his book titled AIDS INC. I watched each fake virus outbreak fizzled out. Just suddenly vanished. We are all going to die to crickets. All of them. His deep research and investigative reporting of others put me way over the top. Love your name Thinking Turtle!
We are trained to trust the authority of the person rather than the authority of the evidence. We receive this training from religions, government schools, the MSM, all kinds of ways. Schools intentionally do not teach critical thinking.
We are controlled through language, and all language is functional. This is why our words are a threat to the establishment.
Indeed, the "deadly viruses" along with "contagion" are the twin towers of Rockefeller lies so He could sell His oil-based "medicines" and jabs. And for the fear factor for control.
Is anyone going to take a gov't to court over this? Stefan Lanka won over measles. Why doesn't he do same for Sars2 - particularly with all the proof amassed by Christine Massey & colleagues? Then there's the German guy who had his fines cancelled due to no proof of virus.
I guess that's a possibility. Someone could do it though, surely? Or a group of people. Alec Zeck comes to mind. It would make a good finale to his recent series. I noticed Lanka also claimed there's no GO in the shots and Scoglio has written a paper on same. Coppolino interviewed him recently on subject. Scoglio claimed microscopists are using CGI to deceive people which of course they're not. Not sure what going on. Bailey's touched on subject some time ago but dropped it pretty quick.
The Scog would need to show strong evidence of alteration via CG from vids, and even better show he could get a GC person to do recreate that, and to what point? How did they prove a negative? If not Graphene, they want to hide another substance to deflect us, like 9.11 deflecting directed energy to thermite? Even then there is evidence of metal in shots-Japan recalled 1.63 mil doses when Dr in vax ten found metal in vial upon warming, they called it steel but I dont believe that. Would have had to slip thru QC of 3 Cos, Moderna, bottler in Spain, and Takeda. That slipping past Takeda is unthinkable unless they were told not to warm up vials. Remember my post on freezing the shots as a colloid: https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/proton-magic-interviews-dr-vial
Question: How many "vaccines" , throughout the past up to present day, have been scrutinized to the same level as the CV vials? How does anyone really know what all was/is in them? We know they are all toxic, but do we have a clue how many nefarious other substances have been/are in them?
Great Question. We don't need Shots of any kind, especially if no virus (thanks PM!, Massey et al.), Preventative health is key. JJ Couey and Dr. Joseph Lee discuss at least 50% of all shots (vax) should be halted immediately. Let me dig up the link.
Hi Peter, look up JJ Couey on Massey's web page. 50% halted means 50% are ok? Ok for what? And are they really ok even if they are for something, and which 50% are ok?
On the vials, colloidal systems freezing issues, have you listened to Prof/Dr Gabriel Segalla? You may know the Pfizer (Cominarty) formula was changed in October 2021 (when it was shown that their PBS buffer containing inorganic electrolytes were apparently highly toxic in a cationic nanoparticle system) https://vimeo.com/807279310 Segalla is independent research biochemist, specialist in chemistry of microemulsions and colloidal systems, author of Pandora's Vaccine.
I really appreciate the info, at about 6 min he starts about the mRNA in the shots making spike, that's when he lost me as a viewer, this was in March '23. He should know there is no mRNA to spike dose response curve and CDC foia says no spike data in shot, and other refs. My recent post, "Proton's Last Theorem" went over mRNA. I hope he's just mistaken and not pushing the fake mechanism of the shots.... See you.
His presentation is based on what Pfizer claims to be in the shot and how they claim it functions. He shows very clearly that there is no way whatever is in the LNPs has any chance of entering the cell and that the damage is done at the extra-cellular level. Note that he'll be appearing as expert witness in an upcoming trial in Italy.
As I remember primary school (age 6-12) pupils formed groups with leaders. I could gossip about leaders, but I could not walk up to a leader and call him a liar. It didn't matter if my point was true or useful. Changes came about by new groups being formed or existing groups changing position.
Allopathic medicine is a big and powerful group. A medical "true speaker", even if he doesn't care about his own status and finances, has friends and family who do. The step from contrarian to whistleblower is one you cannot cross.
I admire Lanka, Scoglio, Coppolino, Zeck and especially the Baileys. The Baileys linked to Proton Magic. The internet is an enlightening show.
Maybe listen to Coppolino's interview with Scoglio. I found it disturbing. Coppolino is also extremely arrogant when interacting with commenters/subscribers. I have absolutely no admiration for him at all anymore. The no-virus group tends to follow the leader. Whatever the top dogs Lanka, Scoglio or Cowan have to say is gospel. So they're not going to touch the nano stuff.
Thanks for the info. I admire some in the no-virus but not necessarily everything everybody says. I want to stay anonymous and unmonitized so I can be a free spirit writer, and avoid professional complications. Some of the no-virus do not want to commit to a stance on something they can not fully back up, and they do benefit from the community they have built up. For disclosure, I do have some email exchange with some of them and it is helpful to share info off line.
If they choose not to focus on certain issues, that's fine but Scoglio IS taking a stance on the nanotech stuff and it's all BS for him. Unfortunately Coppolino stifled any debate in the comments section and Scoglio didn't even bother to engage with commenters. Very disappointing.
Speaking as a fairly well-known no-virus person, part of the "they" you refer to: I don't focus on the quackcines at all anymore. Tons of people are doing that, while still relatively few address the fact that there's never been any "virus" shown to exist, ever in the history of virology, to get quackcinated against. It's got nothing to do with following any leader or "gospel", it's my own personal choice. It's quite offensive to read your false presumption.
The subject of the interview was whether or not there was GO in the shots. Scoglio claims there's not and that those who claim there is are frauds. That's pretty offensive too don't you think?
ARRC Seminar Series - Prof. Ian F. Akyildiz "These Covid Vaccines Are Nothing More Than Bio-Nano Machines, They Are Programmed And Then Injected Into The Body" - Graphene-based Plasmonic Nano-Antenna for Terahertz Band Communication in Nanonetworks
It's also more recent. If you're interested in the IoBNT, I've found John Lukach to explain it very well. See articles on his blog on the subject. Parts 1 thru 5 analyse IEEE doc(s) and translate into layman's terms, as far as possible. Akyildiz is too rambling for my liking, and also a psychopath:
It wouldn't change anything. Yes,Stefan won in court but what good did it do? People will still believe what they choose and all courts are corrupt anyway. Look at how many lawsuits have been won about vaccines, mandates, EMFs, pesticides, and the like. It changes nothing. An individual winning something on a personal level will help that person at that time. On a larger scale, however, it's basically just a money maker for attorneys and the state.
Yes, it woke a few up, a few. And many of those. just like with the Sars deceit exposure, still believe in the hundreds of other claimed pathogenic viruses. More will come around eventually, but court cases are really just a farce as far as any real impact. Precedents are important, to a degree, but the same thing applies. Until people realize they are living in a totally false reality, that every remedy that appears available isn't a remedy at all, and that they are, and have always been, free, they only have to choose that, nothing much will change. It makes people feel good to "do" something, but it has little impact on the masses nor does it provide what people really need. They, themselves, have to find that, unfortunately. When the student is ready the teacher will appear. Until then they won't even recognize that opportunity.
The court system is just as corrupt as the medical system. People who went to college together and who are on interlocking boards of directors of companies. Lawsuits and hopes for getting pharma execs on perp walks are not useful places to put energy.
we should qualify that we don't want to take the government to court because ultimately that would mean that the financial burden of both sides plus whatever compensatory ruling would come out of OUR pockets. We need to criminally charge these people as individuals.
Here's a thought. The courts are corrupt like the politicians, the governments and all the other organized systems on earth at this time in history. That doesn't mean people shouldn't try to bring cases, just that they should not expect to prevail.
The problem I see with that is that it ties up a whole lot of precious time and resources which can be better spent. Now, I didn't always think this way but more and more is becoming clear and the way "we" are going at things is just spinning our wheels and it's intended that way.
Not to mention the storage of that one and only brew from the patient's lungs. How can serious scientist ever believe that this -80° alone do not change the characteristics of anything inside this BALF? The following is hysterical set of a stage, but without the cameras and catering and all that hollywood movie fun stuff. But maybe some outakes. Like when they arbitrarily chose and picked one short piece of "sequenzes" to build up the entire story on.
I wish that one day someone in fact makes a movie that shows what was really going on. Maybe the entertaining way gets the truth to the people (aka Dummies).
Mullis combined a diversity of existing analytical methods and came up with something useful FOR ANALYSIS and finding molecules below the standard limit of detection.
However, none of this is about him. By Jan. 1, 2020, long before really but that was "the day before covid," all governments and the medical establishment WERE ON NOTICE of the 100% false positive problem. Please see this article:
A surfer chemist high on acid does not stop his car in the California mountains to write down the method of a thing to "detect" fake viruses — a thought that was unlikely to be anywhere at all near his mind. There is NO evidence of that; you are merely speculating.
But THERE IS EVIDENCE that the medical establishment and the governments of the world ***knew in 2007*** after global publicity of the DARTMOUTH-HITCHCOCK incident that when looking for even a DNA fragment (no RT phase using a real and NOT in silico test kit), that the PCR can and would get 100% false positives.
To ascribe blame to Mullis 20 years earlier is to miss the point of who committed this fraud how. It is to blame someone who was not responsible and not alive at the time and who warned many times about the fallacy of the PCR as a diagnostic. It to let many people WHO KNEW the problem off the hook. Notably Mullis did not own the patent and had no control over how it was used.
Let's keep some perspective here. PCR is fantastic for some things, and was also the perfect tool for these criminals to trot out when they needed 100% false positives because THEY KNEW that is what they would get.
Eric, your articles on Rancourt on Mullis are quite nice. A few points:
1. About "false positives" How can there be a false positive if there are no true positives since there is no DNA pertaining to a virus? There cant be any false positives as you can see. Did you mean to say "artifact positives", or "fake positives"? "False positives" suggests "if the test was just tuned better we'd get that damn virus", and is pushing the official narrative. Test is unvalidated because there is no viral object.
2. I don't blame Mullis, only that he seems to be a front man (with lots of help in the back office to pull this off)-that would be the same for making Graphene wouldn't it be? You can't say PCR is real but GO is not real when each could theoretically be a fabricated story. You need proof for or against each one.
- Almost no work history
-Few research papers-see his Wiki pg and pub med. One nutty one on cosmology in the 60s, one on hypothetical latent viruses that pushed the HIV virus/Pharma position (which there can't be because viruses must replicate-and no one has any evidence of that). One just a Sci Am review on pcr, and one an autobiog. The other one a Cetus corporate written paper (that increases the stock price doesn't it?). This is a sorry state of academic pubs for a Nobelist or any professional researcher or academic.
3. He himself goes off topic into some nutty talks, used lots of drugs, etc. Seems like Character making.
4. No photos of him and lab guys.
Pls read this before you make a quick reply, take your time, there is no rush.
5. The article from 35 yrs ago isn't research data and doesn't prove much. It also assumes DNA and it's properties are as stated in the text books, though there are big questions remaining. I'm not taking a stand, just a questioning stance. See these:
I'm not buying your "no photos" thing. It's Paul McCartney BS. There are no photos of me working at Whitaker Newsletters. There is just one of me at the Echoes Sentinel. No photos of Student Leader News Service team. These were all extended, important phases of my career. To show fraud, you need evidence of fraud.
Lack of evidence is not evidence of fraudulent intent. And like McCartney/Beatles/ Travistock, and "flat Earth," you are pursuing an angle that is merely a hobby. It is not provable and not useful. My life as a reporter is populated with documents and interviews. I can document, in documents, everything I say is so as a reporter. I question people who are involved and I get them onto the record.
You are merely taking some existing (seeming) puzzle pieces and saying "they look this way this way" when in fact that is merely an interpretation that, conveniently, cannot be refuted (for the same reason it cannot be proven). Meanwhile you are distracting people from the known fraudulent use of the PCR starting in Dec. 2019, which lets the real actors off the hook. After Dartmouth, PCR's sad career as a diagnostic tool was over. From there, it became a false-positive tool and please don't give me this rhetoric about "no false since there are no true." You know what I am talking about and I have made clear in my abundant writing on this issue that there are no true positives.
We are up against limitations of language in this realm of deception. Yet this is not a word game. The PCR is being used to deceive people to the present day on many illnesses it cannot "diagnose."
Well we generally agree about all the PCR fraud and if you mean Fake Positive=False positive ok sure. Your article to Rancourt used false and while I hear you mean fake to me personally, an official scientific letter to Rancourt should really use fake/artifact whatever word is best not false though but I hear you now, ok we dont need to harp on it.
About Mullis, it is true I'm making a Journalistic opinion of him as "actor", not a proof of fraud. Did I use fraud in the post? If I did, I will promptly remove that (cant find it), if I didnt you are putting words in my mouth which isn't right. I quoted Omar as saying, "the entire concept of the PCR test is fraudulent". I never called Kary a fraud. So with the data I have collected from MUCH MORE THAN JUST THE PHOTO ISSUE, looking and reading his papers on Wiki and on Pub Med, seeing his video interviews (on the post) and Ted Talks, and importantly the very long Omar data sheet, I have the journalistic right to opine he is a front man and actor, just like you can read same about Musk, Trump, Zuck, Gates, etc. Writers have the right to opine on public figures, I suppose defamation or slander aside. Again, if you want to debunk the Omar doc that's great-there's too much in it I'm not gonna repeat in this comment, I would be happy you make a comment on it here, and if you post it, of course you can leave a link on this comment section and I will restack it. I don't think it's valuable for us to argue how much he was frontage for a bigger org as we generally agree to the PCR issues.
Journalism is not about an opinion. It is about a set of facts presented that add up to either a balanced presentation or an irrefutable conclusion, where the other sides are presented fairly. You are on solid ground if you assert publicly that you are presenting your personal viewpoint. Yet you are also accusing a person whom you cannot call and ask for comment. Mullis cannot defend himself and that makes him an easy target. While he cannot sue you for libel, in my view it is still hitting below the belt. He has no way to defend himself or his reputation.
However, I continue to assert that this whole field of discussion is irrelevant **in contrast to who determined that the PCR would be used for the "covid" project in 2019**. We need to be going after the parties who were ON NOTICE that the system threw 100% "fake positives" meaning that there were no true positives and that false epidemics were documented to have been caused three times c. 2006. This was widely published at the time, and my work connected it to "covid" or it might have been entirely forgotten.
One last; in my view as an editor, there are no anonymous investigative reporters. The very essence of investigative reporting, and of authentic news reporting generally, is accountability, including internal accountability. While the lack of accountability does not assure lack of integrity, it becomes exceedingly easy to let standards slip (if they ever existed) when you can change your name and reincarnate tomorrow.
Therefore, you must hold yourself to the very highest standards of multiple sourcing of facts and minimal conclusions about what those facts might point to, and presenting alternative points of view. This is not a game, unless you want to play the game that in the postmodern world there is no truth. You certainly seem to imply that there is such a thing.
We're not trying to do the same thing. I'm giving opinion or data with proofs where I collected it (like FOIA or screen shots of what someone says on an email or SS), or just links from others you can see who they are.
This is just vounteer, completely unmonetized so i can write freely and without professional complications. Imagine if I worked in a law firm, a govt agency, the military, or as an MD with a licensing board. You do understand this don't you? You collect money from your work, I dont. People can take me or ditch me. This is only to share info with my fellow humans. Me and you dont need to argue about it and on that topic we are at the end of our rope. But I do like your work.
There is a reason you like my work. Despite being queer, I walk a straight and narrow path. And I answer my phone, which is a veracity standard. Also, whether I am paid or not is irrelevant. I spent far more doing the "covid" and PCR stories than I ever took in. Monetization does not appear in my Editorial Policy except as relates to conflict of interest, and I have none.
I suggest your read the book American Ground Zero and learn the accounts of those upon whom nuclear bombs were tested in Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and surrounds during the 1950s. These are eyewitness accounts of both events and subsequent illness that must stand on their own.
They are separate issues, other than the fact that countries with nuclear power tend to become nuclear armed. What is your guiding principle? I use the Precautionary Principle in my work with the public. I work under the potential of the worst case scenario until that is addressed. I see you are a writer and collaborating with other writers, holding yourself out to the public as one with knowledge. Do you have an editorial policy? What is your proper name and service address? Who is your editor? In other words, to whom are you accountable for what you say, and what is the path of accountability?
Are you saying I am not allowed to make an anonymous SS? I only provide info, people can take it any way they want. So my writing is accountable to the public that reads it, anyone who is not interested can not look at it.
On nukes I have mainly collected info from others that make sense to me and I posted it in a palatable way
and in the top comment photos and articles by Japanese who lived thru it.
If you dont agree with Palmer article (Tom Cowan also pushed that one recently) or the Mathis article, that's fine. You can tell me/us why or you can ignore it. So far you don't seem to have read links I've sent you. Up to you.
Of course you can make an anonymous Substack. I am saying that my editorial policy does not count you as an investigative reporter or a reliable source. As far as nukes, there is no discounting the eyewitness testimony, and we are still in the territory of the precautionary principle. However, nukes are also a pastime or hobby since there is nothing you can personally do about them, now or if you are vaporized by one. That there are questions about August 1945 does not automatically invalidate Ivy Mike.
"A surfer chemist high on acid does not stop his car in the California mountains to write down the method of a thing to "detect" fake viruses — a thought that was unlikely to be anywhere at all near his mind. There is NO evidence of that; you are merely speculating."
Nor is there any evidence of this story actually happening. I think you should re-evaluate the definitino of the word "evidence" - "the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid."
The only evidence you have is a story that Mullis wrote about. Same with your silly notion about nuclear weapons existing based merely on some stories.
Meanwhile, there's plenty of evidence of fraudulent activity both on Mullis's hands and all over the lies of Nuclear Weapons. But you ignore those things and only care to listen to yourself and protect not just Mullis but the Nuke Fraud. Why?
Do you really consider yourself a "journalist"? - you're a joke.
Also - Your argument about "no photos" is full of holes and illogical. Just because there are "no photos" of you working here or there, that doesn't mean you didn't work at those places. What it means is that there's no photographic evidence of you working at those places, making it harder to prove that you worked there, or did what you said you did while you worked there.
On the other hand, there are other photos of you engaged in other activities, so we can also verify that this is you, right?
Hello pooanon, I've reviewed the topic carefully and apologies for the last note. I have determined that no action is necessary to be taken at this time and deleted my follow up comment as well and your your "why" question so not to confuse readers on the thread. Regards.
Why would he admit fraud? You really are a silly person. Have you gone through the paper that was posted? Of course these things can never be proven conclusively, but we can use deductive reasoning to build a "most likely scenario" can't we? Or is that not allowed in your bubble as a "journalist" ??
The guy won the Noble Prize for a reason, stop acting coy and protecting him.
I am not saying he would admit fraud. That is not how fraud is documented. It's documented through establishing prior knowledge. And fraud is generally not committed by an individual scientist. Mullis never owned the PCR. As work under hire, it was the property of Cetus, which sold it for $300 million. Mullis was given a $10,000 honorarium.
Assemblies are being made. Why at all do they need to assemble aka puzzle something together, that should be found as a whole, replication competent, invasive, living, cell-hijacking entity? Imagine that for every other field of research. For an animal, a machine. Anyone else than virologist would doubt that there ever was a complete, distinguished "something", if ongoing only fragments are found. At least when an entire branch of "sience" is build upon this.
Primers are being designed and picked. How can primers be Made and chosen for something unknown? Imagine building a trap for something that nobody knows? By 86% accordance to an older Version of another assembly? They either could catch a mouse or an elephant in the same room.
They take a sample and always find the suspected particle of concern. Or not that specific particle at all. But nothing else, none of the alleged hundereds of other viruses or, only 16 million variants of the one they look for. Because the primer only finds that "specific" particle. The primer they chose. The primer they designed with the help of another assembly, that "matches" 86%. Without even knowing what to look for. In a contaminated brew, "enriched" with all sorts of material from monkeys and cows. Mixed with chemicals.
Well said, In 2021 soon after I understood the assembly fraud as you note, I made a comment that they are making a library and deciding what books are on the shelf, that way they are in complete control of what books you can look up and find.
So if someone is an agent but I don't see Revelation of the Method somewhere I'm not happy. What do you think of this? In Kary's talk on his teenage rocket-making days he says that he put little piles of mixtures with different ratios of potassium nitrate and sugar and bingo! he found 50/50 KNO3/sugar worked best. He then clarified that that was by volume although by weight it was 60/40 - he didn't say which way, however, I looked up "sugar rocket fuel" and it says 60 KNO3 / 40 sugar. I looked up the densities of KNO3 and sugar and KNO3 is actually denser which - according to my reckoning - means that if you were going by volume 50/50 wouldn't be correct. Also, he says the father of a friend named Buzz was a pilot and flew at 2 miles above the sand pit a cop had directed the boys to experiment with their rockets at but in fact their rockets exceeded that height which strikes me as implausible ... as does a friend's father flying his plane above the sand pit as a means of testing how high the rocket went.
I do like the friend called Buzz ... oh and guess what? Buzz Aldrin's father was an aviator and assistant commandant of the Army's first test pilot school at McCook Field, Ohio, from 1919 to 1922.
'For equity of karma, his handlers would say to us, “Well we told you honestly this was a hoax, your fault you didn’t get it!”'
Exactly. Revelation of the method. Drives me utterly nuts how people don't apply the Revelation of the Method lens when viewing suspected psyops and don't properly take the phenomenon on board even when they're familiar with it. At the moment I'm staying with friends and when I speak of this or that event as a psyop one of them responds, "That's not a psyop, psyops are events used as a pretext to go to war." I'm like, "Yeah, that's one kind." Of course, there's loads and loads of psyops with various pretexts - big ones and little ones all over the place. My definition of a psyop is anything pretending to be something it isn't which employs Revelation of the Method. And that's why if the moon landings were faked (I'm pretty certain they were real) I wouldn't call them a psyop because I see no evidence of Revelation of the Method, I'd class their fakery as something else if they were faked.
I guess it's up to each of us to define psyop as we see fit and I can certainly see your point about TV ads and TV in general however inclusion of Revelation of the Method is what I see as fit I suppose because all the most recognised psyops include it. I definitely think there should be a term for all events that include ROTM so perhaps we need a new one. ROTM event? Doesn't work, does it, besides ROTM is only a feature of the event, and while I guess I think it's a defining feature it doesn't feel right to call it by that feature.
Righto, Almost a year ago I also asked the contact mail on that paper for the raw patient and machine data, no reply. We also sent FOI to China on their Govt FOI portal in Chinese, in July, no reply.
The paper is virology fraud in claiming there was a virus from software, no controls, then immediately published and the PCR test made form it immediately. Since C-19 test kit patent 2015 and exports 2017-18 and others in my "Fake Dating Dossier..." post you can see, it's all fraud, and conveniently in China so there isn't even a veneer of accountability clearly.
Its just cytopathic effect and Next Gen sequencing, they didnt isolate a particle and characterize it. You need to read the terms in these papers so you understand what they are really doing. NEVER BELIEVE THE WORD ISOLATION IN A PAPER TITLE and then send it out, YOU need to learn how to read them.
Thanks - so much substack-so little time - I never did get back here. And now I see the claim that Mullis had "handlers" - ?! - if anyone was the real deal it was him - (I had thought) - I almost fell in love with the guy via his hard to find videos. And Mike Yeadon - ?!? - not entirely on board with him either? I have some catching up to do here!
Thanks for the links - I do like to challenge and be challenged in my beliefs assumptions, etc. I downloaded the Yeadon piece - and ran though the first few pages quickly. Two things - 1) he has spoken to the 2009 Pfizer fraud settlement. Claims - I think correctly - it was a marketing initiative - he was in R&D - claims he and his colleagues (In R&D) just shook their heads in a sort of "what will they get up to next" sort of way. and 2) my sense is that he has recently come to question many of his life long assumptions and beliefs about pharmaceuticals and medical knowledge. He has engaged honestly with the no-viruses line of thought - Cowan, Kaufmann, et al. ...
I will try to make time tor read - all three of them. Thanks for your efforts.
Thanks. on 1) that's making it seem he could be anti drug co. Pfizer really doesn't care, look at the % of people who took the Pfizer shots with not a care in the world. On 2) It's too late. 80% of the pop got poisoned darts.
Typical propaganda strategy: make it seem he is on your side but add info most people cant understand about ADE and variants thus actually he's virus pushing. Later, when it's too late, question the bigger picture, but not fully. "See I'm still on your side" smiling Cheshire cat as your body clots into oblivion.
Some of you may now rightly suspect that PCR was MADE to fabricate virus finding, not just USED to find fake viruses. PM's famous last words, "Evil doesn't leave anything to chance", and fabrications need a fabricator, Kary's the man!
OMG. I got blocked by most of them yesterday .. 😂🤯. WTF. They must be terrified. I was able to follow the SCIENCE & when I say I took barely any science in school or college, I am serious. I graduated with BA. No real science necessary 😂.
After finding Sabrina on Odyssey & all you guys .. it took me only 8 weeks to figure it out.
Your claim is that Kary Mullis created this technique intentionally for this purpose of it being misused to fabricate virus finding? I'd love to see your evidence of this.
I said "suspect...was made", suspect is not a definitive claim, and "fabricator" I mean fabricating the hype of the test with his persona and the virus pushing and etc that I have said in the Mullis Movie Star post. The real inventor Erlich may have invented the test for fabricating viruses either by intent or was funded to do this kind of work not knowing what is might be used for. This is standard Rockefeller Medicine Technique. Just guessing based on where we are now.
From Omar's article ref in that post it should be clear who did what:
Again, as admitted in even the mainstream articles, PCR was just an alleged "idea" that Mullis had ... the actual in-lab work was conducted by a team of technicians that didn’t include Mullis. That team was headed by Dr. Henry Erlich. So why does the Nobel Prize website still credit Mullis as the “inventor” - is it just because he originally had the idea? How could anyone prove that the idea was originally his, anyways?
Google defines inventor, as:
a person who invents, especially one who devises some new process, appliance, machine, or article; one who makes inventions.
But Mullis didn’t do any of that at all. He wasn’t involved in devising a new process, appliance, machine, etc. All he did was allegedly “have an idea” one night while driving and half-tripping on acid. What a rebel.
At best, we have some stories of him allegedly conducting some half-assed solo experiments in a lab at Cetus, but no real evidence of that work.
Furthermore, his idea wasn’t an original one either, it was specifically an idea on how to improve previous processes. But the main point here is that Mullis wasn’t involved in any inventing, lab-work or on-the-ground processes at all.
Since the early 1980s, Henry A. Erlich has been well-known in the forensic and medical communities for helping to pioneer the research and development of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR ) technique that ultimately led to a number of important forensic and clinical applications. As a result of the pioneering efforts of Erlich and his team of scientists, the first commercial PCR typing kit was developed specifically for forensic use.
My understanding is that while Mullis is credited with the conceptualization and invention of PCR, the Nobel Committee typically awards the prize to individuals who have made seminal contributions to a discovery or invention.
The actual work in the lab, including the refinement and application of PCR, often involves collaborative efforts by a team of scientists.
& this makes sense to me.
Henry Erlich is alive and well is he not? So if this was truly his invention then why not speak up? Or did he? or maybe it was "decided" that Mullis would be the front man. Maybe Mullis was the front man but also the patsy? & how is it that Mullis died just a couple of months before covid's theatrical debut? This seems like an interesting twist too.
But maybe none of this matters. I mean aren't we just getting caught in the weeds here, which in and of itself is a trap. I've just spend about 30 + minutes writing this response & to what end? It seems like there is a desire for "the people" "the peasants" to be focused on, and arguing about things that are inconsequential in the grand scheme. They want us to be distracted and divided. They want us to argue and they don't really care about what. Isn't this just playing into their hands?
I have no doubt that we are at war. 5th gen warfare style and if that is the case then we should be mindful to not get caught in unproductive or distracting arguments.
I fall for it less often now but here I am typing something that will not serve any purpose or be helpful to anyone.
What you say has a lot of truth, BUT, the more we learn the more it can trickle thru the population. Many people have woken up in the last 4 yrs, some had to have a bad shot reaction. That is the big picture and you are part of it. But back to the details,
1. The Nobel Committee has long been (probably from the start) a propaganda arm of the plutocracy (what exactly did Pres I'llBombYa do to get the prize besides destroy uncountable families in the Mid East?). Kary played his part very well over the years, his persona well-hid the fact that pcr is an act itself when it comes to viruses, it's ALL FAKERY. PCR as an idea was around many yrs, imagining it while driving high on LSD is not really seminal of much but it has the, "yeah, only a cool guy on a psychadelic could think of that, wow!" punch to it so people would believe it.
2. There is no proof Mullis died, but I don't know. He would have been inconvenient being around that is for sure, but operatives like JFK, RFK, Epstein, frequently just go underground or back stage lets say. If you are new to this idea, pls see my recent post, "Jackie the Car Jumper".
3. We don't know what Erlich's position is. Just a hard worker in the dark about what lurks around him? A Free Mason Mule of the Elite? A high level Peerage guy? Just another onion layer of the actors?
Knowing the TYPES of games that are played on us IS VERY IMPORTANT, the details of each game is less important as you rightly say, but you need to see some details or you wont get the big pic. Sometimes just break from this stuff and enjoy life is my advice.
Point well taken.
I saw a montage of all those NASA astronauts that “died” when it blew up…some haven’t even changed their names.
And a few conveniently had “identical twins” as well.
Watch TruthTv on Rumble or
https://www.truthtide.tv/
Really great informative video content - look for NASA (deceiver) content. Also RUMBLE The Lies they tell you about NASA.
https://rumble.com/c/CelebrateTruth
You’ll be very busy on these sites.
Carey mocked Fauci’s credentials on video and also said you can “find anything “ using PCR test.
Basically implying it isn’t’ reliable to test for ILLNESS because we have these proteins in our nose and it doesn’t mean we will get sick.
He didn’t seem PRO establishment or part of the conspiracy per se and he conveniently died JUST before the go live Covid Dec 2019 date.
He died due to pneumonia around July 2019…
He would’ve definitely spoken out about this PCR test being used…
He was a healthy surfer living in Southern California at the time of his death.
There's no proof Kary Mullis died, we don't have a body to examine, and these elite persons are known to go underground frequently (see Mark Staycer), and for Kary is was a meaningful time to disappear. Kary was a darling of the blob, for his "marketing" of PCR in a sense, having fake fights with Fauci just like Rand Paul, he wouldn't go against pcr, anymore then he did for HIV, "the test can find anything"- but that doesn't mean there is no virus. He might be challenged to make statements on whether Covid virus existed, that would be inconvenient for the plan which he is part of so they wouldn't kill him. He's like the rest of the suspicious "deaths": Morrison, Lennon, JFK, RFK, Cobain, most pertinently the Challenger crew, it's a long list. Once you hear something over and over again from a million "official" sources you can stubbornly believe anything.
I'm not saying you're wrong or right but this is something you can't know for sure, which in and of itself is discrediting.
What I'm noticing is that the more time people spend down 'the rabbit hole' unraveling the lies, half truths, deceptions, manipulations, etc they tend to make everything a cloak and dagger, everything's a conspiracy.
🎯🎯🎯🎯‼️‼️‼️
Wow. Didn’t know that whole story
It is difficult to get a shill to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.
I don't fully understand why it is so difficult for people to see that they liie especially with no real proof, fake scoence, foias that tell the same thing. No proof.
I think it’s a combination of prefix “dr” and the white lab coat.
During covid randomly meeting doctors I would say you doctors wear blinders and I can prove it to you. Have you heard of vaers? No. It's a extremely underreporred government data base on vaccine injuries and deaths. Ect. Vaccines causes injures and death. No no, Vaccines saves lives. Right that's what you say and that's your experience. But this is the blinders part I'm talking about, all of these maamed and deaths are actually happening by the doctors and you doctors are incapable to admit it. That's right I won't because they save lives. I know you're going to say this and say that, as the injuries and deaths keep piling up. Blinders. Have a nice day.
But your list of David Martins, is astonishing. I say fine, a lab leak. If that's the case, it still has not been properly isolated, so when your testing for it, you're not really testing for it. And these are the smart people. Ok. Ok.
They must be trying to do something to get somewhere that I'm missing.
They listen and obey, they do not think and investigate.
Yes Master!
Yes. I called in to a Dr on a radio show & got an air live & asked about VAERS data. He said it was all misinformation 🤬🤬
Smart gets tossed around easily these days. Like when your dog can find the hidden ball, he’s so smart! Critical thinking has been drummed out of education at all levels. Now people feel smart when they can regurgitate
I believed anti-vaxxers where crazy religious nutters until 2020. In what year did you realise viruses don't exist?
Around 2010. From following Jon Rappoports Nomorefake news and reading his book titled AIDS INC. I watched each fake virus outbreak fizzled out. Just suddenly vanished. We are all going to die to crickets. All of them. His deep research and investigative reporting of others put me way over the top. Love your name Thinking Turtle!
We are trained to trust the authority of the person rather than the authority of the evidence. We receive this training from religions, government schools, the MSM, all kinds of ways. Schools intentionally do not teach critical thinking.
We are controlled through language, and all language is functional. This is why our words are a threat to the establishment.
Indeed, the "deadly viruses" along with "contagion" are the twin towers of Rockefeller lies so He could sell His oil-based "medicines" and jabs. And for the fear factor for control.
For any who have not seen:
A Post to Be Viral (article): https://amaterasusolar.substack.com/p/a-post-to-be-viral
Is anyone going to take a gov't to court over this? Stefan Lanka won over measles. Why doesn't he do same for Sars2 - particularly with all the proof amassed by Christine Massey & colleagues? Then there's the German guy who had his fines cancelled due to no proof of virus.
Likely he and his family have been threatened.
I guess that's a possibility. Someone could do it though, surely? Or a group of people. Alec Zeck comes to mind. It would make a good finale to his recent series. I noticed Lanka also claimed there's no GO in the shots and Scoglio has written a paper on same. Coppolino interviewed him recently on subject. Scoglio claimed microscopists are using CGI to deceive people which of course they're not. Not sure what going on. Bailey's touched on subject some time ago but dropped it pretty quick.
The Scog would need to show strong evidence of alteration via CG from vids, and even better show he could get a GC person to do recreate that, and to what point? How did they prove a negative? If not Graphene, they want to hide another substance to deflect us, like 9.11 deflecting directed energy to thermite? Even then there is evidence of metal in shots-Japan recalled 1.63 mil doses when Dr in vax ten found metal in vial upon warming, they called it steel but I dont believe that. Would have had to slip thru QC of 3 Cos, Moderna, bottler in Spain, and Takeda. That slipping past Takeda is unthinkable unless they were told not to warm up vials. Remember my post on freezing the shots as a colloid: https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/proton-magic-interviews-dr-vial
Question: How many "vaccines" , throughout the past up to present day, have been scrutinized to the same level as the CV vials? How does anyone really know what all was/is in them? We know they are all toxic, but do we have a clue how many nefarious other substances have been/are in them?
Great Question. We don't need Shots of any kind, especially if no virus (thanks PM!, Massey et al.), Preventative health is key. JJ Couey and Dr. Joseph Lee discuss at least 50% of all shots (vax) should be halted immediately. Let me dig up the link.
Edit: - https://www.twitch.tv/gigaohmbiological/video/1955162291 (1:40:00 - 1:50:00)
It's worth the 10 mins span. (linking of excess anti-bodies/ clot formation)
Hi Peter, look up JJ Couey on Massey's web page. 50% halted means 50% are ok? Ok for what? And are they really ok even if they are for something, and which 50% are ok?
On the vials, colloidal systems freezing issues, have you listened to Prof/Dr Gabriel Segalla? You may know the Pfizer (Cominarty) formula was changed in October 2021 (when it was shown that their PBS buffer containing inorganic electrolytes were apparently highly toxic in a cationic nanoparticle system) https://vimeo.com/807279310 Segalla is independent research biochemist, specialist in chemistry of microemulsions and colloidal systems, author of Pandora's Vaccine.
Sorry getting overloaded, I cant catch everything, but happy if you use the comments to give us info!
No worries. I posted it because it was relevant to your "Mr Vial" link.
I really appreciate the info, at about 6 min he starts about the mRNA in the shots making spike, that's when he lost me as a viewer, this was in March '23. He should know there is no mRNA to spike dose response curve and CDC foia says no spike data in shot, and other refs. My recent post, "Proton's Last Theorem" went over mRNA. I hope he's just mistaken and not pushing the fake mechanism of the shots.... See you.
Missing the finale. I beg you. Go watch video by Ian Akyildiz.. one of jab inventors 😐🙏🙏. It’s ALL there.
His presentation is based on what Pfizer claims to be in the shot and how they claim it functions. He shows very clearly that there is no way whatever is in the LNPs has any chance of entering the cell and that the damage is done at the extra-cellular level. Note that he'll be appearing as expert witness in an upcoming trial in Italy.
As I remember primary school (age 6-12) pupils formed groups with leaders. I could gossip about leaders, but I could not walk up to a leader and call him a liar. It didn't matter if my point was true or useful. Changes came about by new groups being formed or existing groups changing position.
Allopathic medicine is a big and powerful group. A medical "true speaker", even if he doesn't care about his own status and finances, has friends and family who do. The step from contrarian to whistleblower is one you cannot cross.
I admire Lanka, Scoglio, Coppolino, Zeck and especially the Baileys. The Baileys linked to Proton Magic. The internet is an enlightening show.
Maybe listen to Coppolino's interview with Scoglio. I found it disturbing. Coppolino is also extremely arrogant when interacting with commenters/subscribers. I have absolutely no admiration for him at all anymore. The no-virus group tends to follow the leader. Whatever the top dogs Lanka, Scoglio or Cowan have to say is gospel. So they're not going to touch the nano stuff.
Thanks for the info. I admire some in the no-virus but not necessarily everything everybody says. I want to stay anonymous and unmonitized so I can be a free spirit writer, and avoid professional complications. Some of the no-virus do not want to commit to a stance on something they can not fully back up, and they do benefit from the community they have built up. For disclosure, I do have some email exchange with some of them and it is helpful to share info off line.
If they choose not to focus on certain issues, that's fine but Scoglio IS taking a stance on the nanotech stuff and it's all BS for him. Unfortunately Coppolino stifled any debate in the comments section and Scoglio didn't even bother to engage with commenters. Very disappointing.
Have you watched the Ian F Akyildiz video on Nonvaxer420 on rumble.
He’s one of jab inventors. It’s from 2020 & he explains the SCIENCE down to molecular level 😐. That’s where I got it
Speaking as a fairly well-known no-virus person, part of the "they" you refer to: I don't focus on the quackcines at all anymore. Tons of people are doing that, while still relatively few address the fact that there's never been any "virus" shown to exist, ever in the history of virology, to get quackcinated against. It's got nothing to do with following any leader or "gospel", it's my own personal choice. It's quite offensive to read your false presumption.
The subject of the interview was whether or not there was GO in the shots. Scoglio claims there's not and that those who claim there is are frauds. That's pretty offensive too don't you think?
I can figure out the science but not cut &’paste lol
Go to Nonvaxer420 on Rumble & watch the video of Ian Akyildiz one if the inventors of jab. I haven’t slept since 😐
ARRC Seminar Series - Prof. Ian F. Akyildiz "These Covid Vaccines Are Nothing More Than Bio-Nano Machines, They Are Programmed And Then Injected Into The Body" - Graphene-based Plasmonic Nano-Antenna for Terahertz Band Communication in Nanonetworks
https://youtu.be/YAtQFkEg5-w
I have NOT seen this one. It’s different from one I watched. Thanks again
It's also more recent. If you're interested in the IoBNT, I've found John Lukach to explain it very well. See articles on his blog on the subject. Parts 1 thru 5 analyse IEEE doc(s) and translate into layman's terms, as far as possible. Akyildiz is too rambling for my liking, and also a psychopath:
http://estateartistry.com/blog/this-is-only-a-test ; http://estateartistry.com/blog/exposing-the-bio-api-part-one ; http://estateartistry.com/blog/exposing-the-bio-api-part-two ; http://estateartistry.com/blog/exposing-the-bio-api-part-three ; http://estateartistry.com/blog/exposing-the-bio-api-part-four ;
http://estateartistry.com/blog/exposing-the-bio-api-part-five ;
http://estateartistry.com/blog/now-do-you-believe-me
Thank you 😊
Look what has happening to Reiner Fuellmich.
It wouldn't change anything. Yes,Stefan won in court but what good did it do? People will still believe what they choose and all courts are corrupt anyway. Look at how many lawsuits have been won about vaccines, mandates, EMFs, pesticides, and the like. It changes nothing. An individual winning something on a personal level will help that person at that time. On a larger scale, however, it's basically just a money maker for attorneys and the state.
Lanka's court case was decisive. It woke many people up, for starters. An individual or group of people winning in court can set a precedent.
Yes, it woke a few up, a few. And many of those. just like with the Sars deceit exposure, still believe in the hundreds of other claimed pathogenic viruses. More will come around eventually, but court cases are really just a farce as far as any real impact. Precedents are important, to a degree, but the same thing applies. Until people realize they are living in a totally false reality, that every remedy that appears available isn't a remedy at all, and that they are, and have always been, free, they only have to choose that, nothing much will change. It makes people feel good to "do" something, but it has little impact on the masses nor does it provide what people really need. They, themselves, have to find that, unfortunately. When the student is ready the teacher will appear. Until then they won't even recognize that opportunity.
There's no need to bring other viruses into the equation. Just focus on SARS-CoV2.
That is a common mistake and leaves people vulnerable to all of the other dangerous lies. Most simply do not expand this to previous and future scams.
We have admissions from gov't health authorities around the world that it doesn't exist, basically. That's all you need.
The court system is just as corrupt as the medical system. People who went to college together and who are on interlocking boards of directors of companies. Lawsuits and hopes for getting pharma execs on perp walks are not useful places to put energy.
we should qualify that we don't want to take the government to court because ultimately that would mean that the financial burden of both sides plus whatever compensatory ruling would come out of OUR pockets. We need to criminally charge these people as individuals.
Here's a thought. The courts are corrupt like the politicians, the governments and all the other organized systems on earth at this time in history. That doesn't mean people shouldn't try to bring cases, just that they should not expect to prevail.
The problem I see with that is that it ties up a whole lot of precious time and resources which can be better spent. Now, I didn't always think this way but more and more is becoming clear and the way "we" are going at things is just spinning our wheels and it's intended that way.
Well done PM
Shows us all Arrogance is The Mother of Ignorance
Not to mention the storage of that one and only brew from the patient's lungs. How can serious scientist ever believe that this -80° alone do not change the characteristics of anything inside this BALF? The following is hysterical set of a stage, but without the cameras and catering and all that hollywood movie fun stuff. But maybe some outakes. Like when they arbitrarily chose and picked one short piece of "sequenzes" to build up the entire story on.
I wish that one day someone in fact makes a movie that shows what was really going on. Maybe the entertaining way gets the truth to the people (aka Dummies).
Mullis combined a diversity of existing analytical methods and came up with something useful FOR ANALYSIS and finding molecules below the standard limit of detection.
However, none of this is about him. By Jan. 1, 2020, long before really but that was "the day before covid," all governments and the medical establishment WERE ON NOTICE of the 100% false positive problem. Please see this article:
https://planetwavesfm.substack.com/p/open-letter-to-prof-denis-rancourt
A surfer chemist high on acid does not stop his car in the California mountains to write down the method of a thing to "detect" fake viruses — a thought that was unlikely to be anywhere at all near his mind. There is NO evidence of that; you are merely speculating.
But THERE IS EVIDENCE that the medical establishment and the governments of the world ***knew in 2007*** after global publicity of the DARTMOUTH-HITCHCOCK incident that when looking for even a DNA fragment (no RT phase using a real and NOT in silico test kit), that the PCR can and would get 100% false positives.
To ascribe blame to Mullis 20 years earlier is to miss the point of who committed this fraud how. It is to blame someone who was not responsible and not alive at the time and who warned many times about the fallacy of the PCR as a diagnostic. It to let many people WHO KNEW the problem off the hook. Notably Mullis did not own the patent and had no control over how it was used.
Let's keep some perspective here. PCR is fantastic for some things, and was also the perfect tool for these criminals to trot out when they needed 100% false positives because THEY KNEW that is what they would get.
Eric, your articles on Rancourt on Mullis are quite nice. A few points:
1. About "false positives" How can there be a false positive if there are no true positives since there is no DNA pertaining to a virus? There cant be any false positives as you can see. Did you mean to say "artifact positives", or "fake positives"? "False positives" suggests "if the test was just tuned better we'd get that damn virus", and is pushing the official narrative. Test is unvalidated because there is no viral object.
2. I don't blame Mullis, only that he seems to be a front man (with lots of help in the back office to pull this off)-that would be the same for making Graphene wouldn't it be? You can't say PCR is real but GO is not real when each could theoretically be a fabricated story. You need proof for or against each one.
- Almost no work history
-Few research papers-see his Wiki pg and pub med. One nutty one on cosmology in the 60s, one on hypothetical latent viruses that pushed the HIV virus/Pharma position (which there can't be because viruses must replicate-and no one has any evidence of that). One just a Sci Am review on pcr, and one an autobiog. The other one a Cetus corporate written paper (that increases the stock price doesn't it?). This is a sorry state of academic pubs for a Nobelist or any professional researcher or academic.
3. He himself goes off topic into some nutty talks, used lots of drugs, etc. Seems like Character making.
4. No photos of him and lab guys.
Pls read this before you make a quick reply, take your time, there is no rush.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fbpYott1Mdw_BuuiE6_rjO_7Xr5Z_PdoxtK3fNZI9Gc/edit
5. The article from 35 yrs ago isn't research data and doesn't prove much. It also assumes DNA and it's properties are as stated in the text books, though there are big questions remaining. I'm not taking a stand, just a questioning stance. See these:
https://criticalcheck.wordpress.com/2021/12/15/dna-discovery-extraction-and-structure-a-critical-review/
https://criticalcheck.wordpress.com/2022/05/08/pcr-and-real-time-rt-pcr-under-critical-review/
I'm not buying your "no photos" thing. It's Paul McCartney BS. There are no photos of me working at Whitaker Newsletters. There is just one of me at the Echoes Sentinel. No photos of Student Leader News Service team. These were all extended, important phases of my career. To show fraud, you need evidence of fraud.
Lack of evidence is not evidence of fraudulent intent. And like McCartney/Beatles/ Travistock, and "flat Earth," you are pursuing an angle that is merely a hobby. It is not provable and not useful. My life as a reporter is populated with documents and interviews. I can document, in documents, everything I say is so as a reporter. I question people who are involved and I get them onto the record.
You are merely taking some existing (seeming) puzzle pieces and saying "they look this way this way" when in fact that is merely an interpretation that, conveniently, cannot be refuted (for the same reason it cannot be proven). Meanwhile you are distracting people from the known fraudulent use of the PCR starting in Dec. 2019, which lets the real actors off the hook. After Dartmouth, PCR's sad career as a diagnostic tool was over. From there, it became a false-positive tool and please don't give me this rhetoric about "no false since there are no true." You know what I am talking about and I have made clear in my abundant writing on this issue that there are no true positives.
We are up against limitations of language in this realm of deception. Yet this is not a word game. The PCR is being used to deceive people to the present day on many illnesses it cannot "diagnose."
Well we generally agree about all the PCR fraud and if you mean Fake Positive=False positive ok sure. Your article to Rancourt used false and while I hear you mean fake to me personally, an official scientific letter to Rancourt should really use fake/artifact whatever word is best not false though but I hear you now, ok we dont need to harp on it.
About Mullis, it is true I'm making a Journalistic opinion of him as "actor", not a proof of fraud. Did I use fraud in the post? If I did, I will promptly remove that (cant find it), if I didnt you are putting words in my mouth which isn't right. I quoted Omar as saying, "the entire concept of the PCR test is fraudulent". I never called Kary a fraud. So with the data I have collected from MUCH MORE THAN JUST THE PHOTO ISSUE, looking and reading his papers on Wiki and on Pub Med, seeing his video interviews (on the post) and Ted Talks, and importantly the very long Omar data sheet, I have the journalistic right to opine he is a front man and actor, just like you can read same about Musk, Trump, Zuck, Gates, etc. Writers have the right to opine on public figures, I suppose defamation or slander aside. Again, if you want to debunk the Omar doc that's great-there's too much in it I'm not gonna repeat in this comment, I would be happy you make a comment on it here, and if you post it, of course you can leave a link on this comment section and I will restack it. I don't think it's valuable for us to argue how much he was frontage for a bigger org as we generally agree to the PCR issues.
Journalism is not about an opinion. It is about a set of facts presented that add up to either a balanced presentation or an irrefutable conclusion, where the other sides are presented fairly. You are on solid ground if you assert publicly that you are presenting your personal viewpoint. Yet you are also accusing a person whom you cannot call and ask for comment. Mullis cannot defend himself and that makes him an easy target. While he cannot sue you for libel, in my view it is still hitting below the belt. He has no way to defend himself or his reputation.
However, I continue to assert that this whole field of discussion is irrelevant **in contrast to who determined that the PCR would be used for the "covid" project in 2019**. We need to be going after the parties who were ON NOTICE that the system threw 100% "fake positives" meaning that there were no true positives and that false epidemics were documented to have been caused three times c. 2006. This was widely published at the time, and my work connected it to "covid" or it might have been entirely forgotten.
Please email me the "Omar doc" at efc@planetwaves.net
One last; in my view as an editor, there are no anonymous investigative reporters. The very essence of investigative reporting, and of authentic news reporting generally, is accountability, including internal accountability. While the lack of accountability does not assure lack of integrity, it becomes exceedingly easy to let standards slip (if they ever existed) when you can change your name and reincarnate tomorrow.
Therefore, you must hold yourself to the very highest standards of multiple sourcing of facts and minimal conclusions about what those facts might point to, and presenting alternative points of view. This is not a game, unless you want to play the game that in the postmodern world there is no truth. You certainly seem to imply that there is such a thing.
I sent it to you 2 comments above
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fbpYott1Mdw_BuuiE6_rjO_7Xr5Z_PdoxtK3fNZI9Gc/edit
We're not trying to do the same thing. I'm giving opinion or data with proofs where I collected it (like FOIA or screen shots of what someone says on an email or SS), or just links from others you can see who they are.
This is just vounteer, completely unmonetized so i can write freely and without professional complications. Imagine if I worked in a law firm, a govt agency, the military, or as an MD with a licensing board. You do understand this don't you? You collect money from your work, I dont. People can take me or ditch me. This is only to share info with my fellow humans. Me and you dont need to argue about it and on that topic we are at the end of our rope. But I do like your work.
There is a reason you like my work. Despite being queer, I walk a straight and narrow path. And I answer my phone, which is a veracity standard. Also, whether I am paid or not is irrelevant. I spent far more doing the "covid" and PCR stories than I ever took in. Monetization does not appear in my Editorial Policy except as relates to conflict of interest, and I have none.
PCR has many applications other than diagnostic. Can you name one?
Can give you some and easy to look up but that's not directly part of our thread.
Nuclear power has many applications, does that mean there are nuke weapons?
I suggest your read the book American Ground Zero and learn the accounts of those upon whom nuclear bombs were tested in Nevada, New Mexico, Utah and surrounds during the 1950s. These are eyewitness accounts of both events and subsequent illness that must stand on their own.
They are separate issues, other than the fact that countries with nuclear power tend to become nuclear armed. What is your guiding principle? I use the Precautionary Principle in my work with the public. I work under the potential of the worst case scenario until that is addressed. I see you are a writer and collaborating with other writers, holding yourself out to the public as one with knowledge. Do you have an editorial policy? What is your proper name and service address? Who is your editor? In other words, to whom are you accountable for what you say, and what is the path of accountability?
Are you saying I am not allowed to make an anonymous SS? I only provide info, people can take it any way they want. So my writing is accountable to the public that reads it, anyone who is not interested can not look at it.
On nukes I have mainly collected info from others that make sense to me and I posted it in a palatable way
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/spooks-with-nukes
and in the top comment photos and articles by Japanese who lived thru it.
If you dont agree with Palmer article (Tom Cowan also pushed that one recently) or the Mathis article, that's fine. You can tell me/us why or you can ignore it. So far you don't seem to have read links I've sent you. Up to you.
Of course you can make an anonymous Substack. I am saying that my editorial policy does not count you as an investigative reporter or a reliable source. As far as nukes, there is no discounting the eyewitness testimony, and we are still in the territory of the precautionary principle. However, nukes are also a pastime or hobby since there is nothing you can personally do about them, now or if you are vaporized by one. That there are questions about August 1945 does not automatically invalidate Ivy Mike.
"A surfer chemist high on acid does not stop his car in the California mountains to write down the method of a thing to "detect" fake viruses — a thought that was unlikely to be anywhere at all near his mind. There is NO evidence of that; you are merely speculating."
Nor is there any evidence of this story actually happening. I think you should re-evaluate the definitino of the word "evidence" - "the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid."
The only evidence you have is a story that Mullis wrote about. Same with your silly notion about nuclear weapons existing based merely on some stories.
Meanwhile, there's plenty of evidence of fraudulent activity both on Mullis's hands and all over the lies of Nuclear Weapons. But you ignore those things and only care to listen to yourself and protect not just Mullis but the Nuke Fraud. Why?
Do you really consider yourself a "journalist"? - you're a joke.
Also - Your argument about "no photos" is full of holes and illogical. Just because there are "no photos" of you working here or there, that doesn't mean you didn't work at those places. What it means is that there's no photographic evidence of you working at those places, making it harder to prove that you worked there, or did what you said you did while you worked there.
On the other hand, there are other photos of you engaged in other activities, so we can also verify that this is you, right?
https://imgflip.com/i/856rwa
Hello pooanon, I've reviewed the topic carefully and apologies for the last note. I have determined that no action is necessary to be taken at this time and deleted my follow up comment as well and your your "why" question so not to confuse readers on the thread. Regards.
I admit to being a funny guy and my history as an artist and presenter in the Tantra community is a matter of public record.
Present me with one document attributed to Mullis that admits or indicates the fraud. Then we will go through the process of authentication.
Why would he admit fraud? You really are a silly person. Have you gone through the paper that was posted? Of course these things can never be proven conclusively, but we can use deductive reasoning to build a "most likely scenario" can't we? Or is that not allowed in your bubble as a "journalist" ??
The guy won the Noble Prize for a reason, stop acting coy and protecting him.
I am not saying he would admit fraud. That is not how fraud is documented. It's documented through establishing prior knowledge. And fraud is generally not committed by an individual scientist. Mullis never owned the PCR. As work under hire, it was the property of Cetus, which sold it for $300 million. Mullis was given a $10,000 honorarium.
excuse me 35ish years earlier, it is late.
here is the story of the discovery in his own words
https://planetwaves.net/the-invention-of-pcr/?
Assemblies are being made. Why at all do they need to assemble aka puzzle something together, that should be found as a whole, replication competent, invasive, living, cell-hijacking entity? Imagine that for every other field of research. For an animal, a machine. Anyone else than virologist would doubt that there ever was a complete, distinguished "something", if ongoing only fragments are found. At least when an entire branch of "sience" is build upon this.
Primers are being designed and picked. How can primers be Made and chosen for something unknown? Imagine building a trap for something that nobody knows? By 86% accordance to an older Version of another assembly? They either could catch a mouse or an elephant in the same room.
They take a sample and always find the suspected particle of concern. Or not that specific particle at all. But nothing else, none of the alleged hundereds of other viruses or, only 16 million variants of the one they look for. Because the primer only finds that "specific" particle. The primer they chose. The primer they designed with the help of another assembly, that "matches" 86%. Without even knowing what to look for. In a contaminated brew, "enriched" with all sorts of material from monkeys and cows. Mixed with chemicals.
That's what happens.
This can't be repeated enough.
Well said, In 2021 soon after I understood the assembly fraud as you note, I made a comment that they are making a library and deciding what books are on the shelf, that way they are in complete control of what books you can look up and find.
Love your creative angle, PM.
So if someone is an agent but I don't see Revelation of the Method somewhere I'm not happy. What do you think of this? In Kary's talk on his teenage rocket-making days he says that he put little piles of mixtures with different ratios of potassium nitrate and sugar and bingo! he found 50/50 KNO3/sugar worked best. He then clarified that that was by volume although by weight it was 60/40 - he didn't say which way, however, I looked up "sugar rocket fuel" and it says 60 KNO3 / 40 sugar. I looked up the densities of KNO3 and sugar and KNO3 is actually denser which - according to my reckoning - means that if you were going by volume 50/50 wouldn't be correct. Also, he says the father of a friend named Buzz was a pilot and flew at 2 miles above the sand pit a cop had directed the boys to experiment with their rockets at but in fact their rockets exceeded that height which strikes me as implausible ... as does a friend's father flying his plane above the sand pit as a means of testing how high the rocket went.
https://youtu.be/iSVy1b-RyVM?si=xO2TeGqfxSWE0Sjb&t=418
I do like the friend called Buzz ... oh and guess what? Buzz Aldrin's father was an aviator and assistant commandant of the Army's first test pilot school at McCook Field, Ohio, from 1919 to 1922.
'For equity of karma, his handlers would say to us, “Well we told you honestly this was a hoax, your fault you didn’t get it!”'
Exactly. Revelation of the method. Drives me utterly nuts how people don't apply the Revelation of the Method lens when viewing suspected psyops and don't properly take the phenomenon on board even when they're familiar with it. At the moment I'm staying with friends and when I speak of this or that event as a psyop one of them responds, "That's not a psyop, psyops are events used as a pretext to go to war." I'm like, "Yeah, that's one kind." Of course, there's loads and loads of psyops with various pretexts - big ones and little ones all over the place. My definition of a psyop is anything pretending to be something it isn't which employs Revelation of the Method. And that's why if the moon landings were faked (I'm pretty certain they were real) I wouldn't call them a psyop because I see no evidence of Revelation of the Method, I'd class their fakery as something else if they were faked.
I think teevee adverts are psyops...
I think everything on teevee is a psyop...
Change my mind...
I guess it's up to each of us to define psyop as we see fit and I can certainly see your point about TV ads and TV in general however inclusion of Revelation of the Method is what I see as fit I suppose because all the most recognised psyops include it. I definitely think there should be a term for all events that include ROTM so perhaps we need a new one. ROTM event? Doesn't work, does it, besides ROTM is only a feature of the event, and while I guess I think it's a defining feature it doesn't feel right to call it by that feature.
Excellent information
Just in case ss gets purged
https://web.archive.org/save/https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/proton-magic-falls-for-fan-wu
Wonderful Sirius, have a great weekend!
Cheers PM ;)
I've written about this in my 7 part series, where I also tried to contact Wu to ask about the specific library preparation steps, if you want to read more, see here: https://usmortality.substack.com/p/why-do-wu-et-al-2020-refuse-to-answer?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
Righto, Almost a year ago I also asked the contact mail on that paper for the raw patient and machine data, no reply. We also sent FOI to China on their Govt FOI portal in Chinese, in July, no reply.
Well, not sure why they are not replying, Eddie Holmes replied, but he didn't know anything.... Maybe this was intentionally planted by Chinese?
The paper is virology fraud in claiming there was a virus from software, no controls, then immediately published and the PCR test made form it immediately. Since C-19 test kit patent 2015 and exports 2017-18 and others in my "Fake Dating Dossier..." post you can see, it's all fraud, and conveniently in China so there isn't even a veneer of accountability clearly.
Korean study claims they isolated the virus using vero cells from the first laboratory-confirmed SARS-CoV-2-infected patient in Korea.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7036342/#B1
They also claim to have sequenced the genome
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/nuccore/MN908947
Its just cytopathic effect and Next Gen sequencing, they didnt isolate a particle and characterize it. You need to read the terms in these papers so you understand what they are really doing. NEVER BELIEVE THE WORD ISOLATION IN A PAPER TITLE and then send it out, YOU need to learn how to read them.
Just here from Conspiracy Sarah - take it a step further - No Virus -and- No Spike Protein - that is, in the virus or produced by the mRNA injections.
https://off-guardian.org/2022/11/07/that-mrna-vaccines-cause-cells-to-produce-spike-proteins-is-a-fairy-tale/
I love trying to be an outlier.
It's unclear if they should be called mRNA shots. Having little luck finding summary of data if RNA is in the vials I made my own:
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/protons-last-theorem
Thanks - so much substack-so little time - I never did get back here. And now I see the claim that Mullis had "handlers" - ?! - if anyone was the real deal it was him - (I had thought) - I almost fell in love with the guy via his hard to find videos. And Mike Yeadon - ?!? - not entirely on board with him either? I have some catching up to do here!
Hi, On Mullis read the entire 40pg doc:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fbpYott1Mdw_BuuiE6_rjO_7Xr5Z_PdoxtK3fNZI9Gc/edit
On yeadon, my post
https://protonmagic.substack.com/p/the-yeadon-challenge
and be sure to read all of this
https://mega.nz/file/MEI2XSDb#dqHqCI7rjZbm-AyLsWdi3zRutf2MiKb1OLILQ7gmnGE
See you
Thanks for the links - I do like to challenge and be challenged in my beliefs assumptions, etc. I downloaded the Yeadon piece - and ran though the first few pages quickly. Two things - 1) he has spoken to the 2009 Pfizer fraud settlement. Claims - I think correctly - it was a marketing initiative - he was in R&D - claims he and his colleagues (In R&D) just shook their heads in a sort of "what will they get up to next" sort of way. and 2) my sense is that he has recently come to question many of his life long assumptions and beliefs about pharmaceuticals and medical knowledge. He has engaged honestly with the no-viruses line of thought - Cowan, Kaufmann, et al. ...
I will try to make time tor read - all three of them. Thanks for your efforts.
Thanks. on 1) that's making it seem he could be anti drug co. Pfizer really doesn't care, look at the % of people who took the Pfizer shots with not a care in the world. On 2) It's too late. 80% of the pop got poisoned darts.
Typical propaganda strategy: make it seem he is on your side but add info most people cant understand about ADE and variants thus actually he's virus pushing. Later, when it's too late, question the bigger picture, but not fully. "See I'm still on your side" smiling Cheshire cat as your body clots into oblivion.