Shove That Fake Genome!🧬

The genome curse has been weighing on me heavily since 2020 when I saw the whole Sars-CoV-2 story was a smoke and mirror show calling computer-printed alphabet genetics a “virus”.

The “smoke” part was some letters registered in a gene library so that Sars-CoV-2 (Covid-19) could only be related to this alphabet (fiction), and the “mirror” part was making pcr primers (short alphabets) to “find” the smoke part because it was a test specified by the bogus PCR making paper as leading to the fiction. This paper even said they made the pcr test, “without having virus material available”.

Ouchie!!

---

👀There is also a separate mini-post today, “Holy Moly” in the pinned comment.

---

There are 2 ways to make this fraud：

1. One is to actually put primers into a patient’s sample and then software-assemble a fictional genome (fiction because no virus has been found).

2. The other is to just make a screenplay, say you did it, and go to lunch.

   Now think carefully about what these could mean to an uninitiated brain:

   #1 can mean that, “there is a virus, the software just figured-out the genome”.

   #2 would mean that, “there is no virus and it is all a fraudulent theater”.

   → Right! This means the the planners are sort of ok with #1 but not #2. This may tell you how to read what someone is really trying to tell you.

   👉What Mafia doing a huge enterprise operation in their right mind would take a chance on assembling a genome with lots of complex steps when they can just say they did and go to lunch?? We know that Mafia like to go to lunch.

   

   Flat genomes for me, round genomes for you！

    Covid is a VERY LARGE project, it needs to run exactly to a “lockstep” plan, they say so themselves (P. 18). They need to have all the proteins they need like spike, furin cleavage site, receptor binding domains, HIV, etc. in the the fake genome for the unfolding fraud and use of the fake virus as a cover for vax injuries that they seem to have known beforehand and probably had articles and papers already written in advance and ready for the roll-out.

   👉Nothing can be left to chance!

Today, I will post an interesting discussion thread I had on this with Michael Wallach (of www.theviraldelusion.com) on this very topic.

→ For more clarity, you can also see this Q & A with Mike in this comment below.

I will tell you ahead of time that the major no-virus group has told me on many occasions to stick with the software assembly narrative, though there is no actual proof of this and it doesn’t sit right with the operational logic of the plandemic, not to mention little proton free-thinking.

→For Genomic nerds: the thread is on this post for some contextual info:

Dr Lanka had approached an eminent mathematician to blow the smoke away from this mathematical complexity hiding the fraudulence behind the claims that a SARS-CoV-2 “virus” had ever been found at all.

---

From the thread

Images and text outside of quote bars are by PM, and reference shots at post bottom.

Proton Magic & Co. Jun 1

Mike, what proof do we have that these alphabets were actually assembled into a supposed genome to begin with? Is there any proof that it wasn't just printed out by Illumina Inc.? Illumina can boast taking on a bunch of staff from Theranos btw, but I digress.

What they write in a paper is no more proof of anything than what the WEF puts on their web site is it?

👉 I will explain why it must have been a pre-written script and result:

1. This is a large enterprise fraud on a tight timeline where no mistakes can be made. Nothing can be left to chance.

2. All the scary fake virus parts of the genome must be there to fit with the story: HIV seqs, furin cleavage site seqs, capsid etc.

3. I asked Fan Wu et al,. for the raw data and software data and code, the make, serial numbers, specs, and settings of the machines used, and got no reply-and put that in a post 2 yrs ago. How can any of this be verified besides stating it is what they spout in their papers?

👉I strongly opine that none of these sequencing procedures were done anywhere and that it is a show, and request actual proof they were done as stated. If we can't prove that it was done then any discussion of the math or seq procedure needs to be prefaced with the fact that it has not been proven exactly what was done and that it is clearly possible it is all a fabrication. Like (12)

That pesky computer’s gotta be in there somewhere:

The better the art the more true the genome becomes

Michael Wallach Jun 1 Author

Hey Proton,

What you are saying certainly could be true. We don't know. But, I actually lean in the other direction. I think how they work is to build institutional pseudo-knowledge step by step, until they have built great cities of bull-sh*t which they can lean on anytime they need. But more specifically, we can see what they did. They came in (Illumina, that is) and they had a sequence in mind which they wanted to "find." Then they went ahead and tested for the contigs on that sequence through pcr amplification until they scored a hit on the contigs they needed. This happens, Lanka once explained, through the heating and cooling involved in repeated cycles, which makes the fragment markers light up without any specificity. So in a way it is entirely manufactured, but its manufactured not by just writing it on a piece of paper, but through a technological process that is ultimately discernible - and that to me is what is so interesting about this Hamburg paper - he was able to discern the sleight of hand used in this process and to pinpoint it mathematically. Liked (12)

Proton Magic & Co. Jun 1

Thanks for reply Mike. Look at the basis of the paper again, "we performed some reference-based assemblies with additional genome sequences such as SARS-CoV, Human immunodeficiency virus, Hepatitis delta virus, Measles virus, Zika virus, Ebola virus, or Marburg virus to study the structural similarity of the present sequence data with the respective sequences."

-Where do they get this data from? We don't know if that was pre-scripted even if based on human seqs. It certainly wasn't taken from a biologic object proven to be a virus. So with the source of the data of the math unknown the math based on that does not itself prove Sars was assembled by metagenomics. Just like we can not make reification fallacies about viruses we should not make reification fallacies of these seq origins. They could also be from metagenomics then airbrushed to fit. We just don't know-though it wasn't reproducible right?

I'm taking two further steps, 1. we dont have raw data of the machines and metagenomic settings/basis, and 2. It is now clear this is an enterprise project where nothing can be left to chance-that is crystal clear. Do you think the events of 9.11 were planned meticulously in advance or they decided to wing it adjusting "a little to the left" or a "little to the right" as they went along?

So my advice to you-as you once gave to me on the child abuse post which I took to heart and revised, is that you should have a caveat/disclaimer statement on the possibility of pre-writing which is entirely possible and actually more logical from a planning point of view. Like (4)

Michael Wallach Jun 1 Author

Thanks Proton. I think we disagree on this in terms of HOW this data is manufactured. I think the evidence points to manufacturing all of these sequence data through manipulating the technological processes through which "accepted" knowledge is accepted. I think that is how they play this game. Yes, there are some moments where they make stuff up whole cloth, but it appears that in this as in most areas, they have a deep understanding of how to get the data they want and then go get it. As for the data, we do have the raw data, or much of it - that is the data the Hamburg fellow used to re-run the processes. As for 9-11, i think it's similar - they didn't make up 9-11 and tell everyone it happened. they manufactured explosions and then told everyone the story they wanted about how and why those explosions happened. no? Like (5)

Proton Magic & Co. Jun 1 Liked by Michael Wallach

"I think the evidence points to manufacturing all of these sequence data through manipulating the technological processes through which "accepted" knowledge is accepted."

-maybe but that is the story in the paper for public consumption. You have no proof of that and the logic of crucial timeline and leaving nothing to chance is hard for your logic to overcome. Just simmer on it slowly, I'm not your logic enemy, take it easy. Like (6)

Michael Wallach Jun 1 Author

yeah no worries. i like thinking this through with you. but remember - they needed a "discovery" which was repeatable by other people around in the world in independent labs. e.g. other labs who could generate this "whole genome" and thus they needed a PROCESS by which those labs could generate this. I think that's an important aspect of how they work. Like (2)

Proton Magic & Co. Jun 1 Liked by Michael Wallach

Agreed! Pre-written and put into software are not mutually exclusive. See we are really buddies after all! Like (4)

Proton Magic & Co. Jun 1

Mike not sure what you mean about,

"they needed a "discovery" which was repeatable by other people around in the world"

because in the body of your post you say the opposite:

"the non-replicable nature of the SARS-CoV-2 sequencing goes far beyond that...we are talking about a computer running the same software upon the same data-set not being able to replicate what was claimed to have happened on another computer running the same software on the same data-set!"　

In conclusion the mathemagcian😹 finds: "that the final (SARS-CoV-2) sequence claimed to match “corona viruses” didn’t even match these theoretical sequences"

-I wonder, does that suggest the original was just printed out of thin air like fiat currency?

---

Why doesn’t Mike reply about his contradicting himself on “the non-replicable nature of the SARS-CoV-2 sequencing” then saying, “they needed a "discovery" which was “which was repeatable”?? I’m sure I’ve read his statements incorrectly.

👉I would add to this discussion that the only thing that is repeatable are pcr primers finding some genetic fragments that are in many things and saying they are Covid.

Reference here :

The genetic sequences used in PCRs to detect suspected SARS-CoV-2 and to diagnose cases of illness and death attributed to Covid-19 are present in dozens of sequences of the human genome itself and in those of about a hundred microbes.

Primers are like a few lego blocks, they can be found in any lego model that uses dozens of blocks, so it is obvious they are not finding something specific.

On this idea from another thread:

Proton Magic & Co.  3 hrs ago

They don't actually assemble an entire genome, THEY SAY they get primers and software makes a consensus (guess) genome (an alphabet sequence with a fake name). Jamie may not be able to find the same consensus genome if he doesn't use the same software with the same settings-so in a non-patient sample he can fall into a trap (I think this has happened to others already testing patient samples, sorry no ref). You can reverse engineer the primer sequences to see what they fit with in a BLAST analysis of known sequences in GenBank etc. and find they fit with dozens of different registered organisms. Once you know that, you've proven the fraud.

THE TRUTH, however, is that the software is just printing out anything you program it to make. Say a lego box makes a spaceship from 1000 legos and then you find 10 of them (primers) in a legoland and your PC says they are part of the spaceship. But those 10 primer legos can fit with a million different [lego] objects. You found what you made by circular nonsense. That is the level of the circus-world we are dealing with. Virology is nonsense fraud, rip it all out of your head, take a cold shower, and you will see the light.

A lego where no man has gone before (or after):

---

Extra mini-post: “HOLY MOLY” which is the top pinned comment below (unrelated to this post on genomes with Mike Wallach).

Dancing the "HOLY MOLY"

Trapping Moles: No permit is required for trapping. Place traps so that they will be triggered as moles travel in the runs. Before placing a trap, make sure the run is active by pressing down with your foot; if the soil is pushed up the next day, the run is still active. 

Opps, wrong link, mole trapping could be valuable info though. Please see the top pinned comment.

---

Shove your genome then dance the Holy Moly.

Yours Truly

Proton Magic & Co.

---

---

Redacted reference shots of the original thread with Mike Wallach:

---