You can bet the farm or ranch that PCR will again be used during the next fake pandemic. You will be told you are positive for some wicked virus and that you are sick and need an mRNA injection, a mask, and lockdown. Even if you have not been ill and feel perfectly fine. Same lies, different virus.
However, there will be no virus to detect...it will once again be pure fantasy. The fact that the DOE redacted specific info paints the government (DARPA, DOD, HHS) guilty of attempted murder using mRNA poisons. The "national security" cloud is again an excuse to avoid telling the public the truth. But I'll speak of it...your government wants you dead and gone.
Not by many. Most of those ignorant enough to go there will be dead by the time the next PLANDEMIC arrives. The American People's next step will surely be REVOLT because we weren't dumb enough to fall for the last PLANDEMIC...
What else would anyone expect from a collective bunch of political thugs - honesty? HA! That's ALMOST funny... particularly when you think about them orchestrating the entire covid-crapola plandemic, murdering millions, and getting away with it despite laws already on the books against first degree, premediated murder. I think, they think, we don't recognize their traps - aka shell games.
It was very easy to find out about the test. The developer himself testified it as lab material and not meant to identify or diagnose. The box says it. Even nurses at the 'test' center told people it was unreliable. A documentary undercover showed how tests were handled. Elon Musk declared he went to test 4 times and tested twice positive and twice negative. It was a scam from before anything happened. It was set up, and everyone who has computer access could have known this. Why people prefer to listen to talking heads on TV is a mystery to me. I only trust what I have looked up for myself. Everyone should do that, not just listen to one source.
Your posts can raise questions: What if PCRs running at high amplification are dispositive only in so far as they demonstrate samples came from a living organism?
There’s something consistent in this type of military-medical regulatory security classification scheme in the COVID context. It’s a familiar info asymmetry from hostage-taking scenarios. Hostages, their loved ones, protectors of the peace and crises negotiators demand a Proof of Life. So, the PCR gives Proof of Life to those in and outside of government, at home and abroad.
Some find it especially concerning in this situation, because our government established the PCR as a theoretical method of illustrating ‘disease’ and health risk, as if ‘Proof’. And then they used PCR claims as if it was meaningful data to justify repeatedly subjecting everyone to a derivative of the thing they called a threat to life in a threatening situation. But regulators also directed everyone to think that people had to survive two weeks after the second of two shots before they were officially defined as being alive given their shot. And, authorities didn’t fully track that data for health purposes. Adverse effects of shots warranted voluntary reports by their doctors, who had no standards to allow them time to do it.
Does the PCR proof of life show us what the business of hostage taking is all about?
Maybe it’s an apt analogy if we sense that those released from their position as hostages, had suffered Stockholm syndrome, and continue to die suddenly now that they can be re- classified as free, counted in ‘excess all cause’ mortality data.
Public protectors and medical professionals do not want to traumatize anyone, so refuse to recognize or fully deal with the previous shots! So too, pathologists and researchers who differentiate types of damage in certain people due to taking certain kinds of shots, are not allowed to publish their data regardless of study techniques.
Bi-partisan leadership need not focus on those with Stockholm syndrome when there are sexier and more extreme things to debate, like Epstein files, Venezuelan boats and Greenland. COVID hostages who are just happy to be alive, seem ready to get the next advanced tech even if it doesn’t involve the familiar shot in the arm. They are likely the most ‘courageous’ and ‘willing’ to take a shot straight up the nose. After all, many who decried lower efficacy than desired in the original shots, have been told that things work better when delivered more directly into nasal mucous membranes where there’s theoretically more immune effects and a shorter distance to payload delivery into all other systems.
Proof of Life? Hostage takers might suggest nobody needs to be worried about PCR data or what’s redacted. After all, some don’t know what they have until it’s gone.
The tests involved a sampling of nasal fluid high in white blood cells and therefor DNA.
Under the 2021 Covid Relief Act positive tests were sent through a federally-funded network of labs called SPHERES to national and international genetic databases.
News reports quoted directors of such databases as calling for increased sharing, and they began holding your DNA in the Public Domain with identifying information attached.
Along with all the DNA that was taken from migrant and asylum seekers at the border from 2017 through the present day, genetic databases have amassed millions of genetic samples of americans as well as foreigners.
The databases have not promised to destroy those samples.
What have they done with that genetic information?
Something seemed off about that test from the beginning. There were so many false readings, and it was being pushed on everyone. My guard went up just as it did when I heard the Covid jab was "95 effective." Ha! Give me a break!
Subhuman B. Gates bought the PCR company knowing it gave 95-99% false positives that would make more money for the subhuman, while he continued with his constant lying his whole wretched life!
This is the first I heard that we relied on a Chinese digital code of the sequence, not a physical sample. Thank you.
But I'm unclear on something: Most people I know who tested did so because they felt sick (whether they had covid or a general flu or other viral infection) and that same person could test again at the end of a 10 day period and get a negative reading. So it can't just be genetic material the test was picking up, or the test would be positive again. Can you explain?
They could have tested a hedgehog or an orange and got a positive result one day and a negative result a few days later and back and forth. This is because PCR uses cycles to read (supposedly) genetic material and there was never an established baseline (or standard) for the number of cycles that were used across all testing. Some tests used 25 cycles and others 45 cycles...meaning results were all over the map. None of this from China was ever pre-tested or in any trial to discover the efficacy of these PCR tests.
A fair and excellent question. The short answer would be because of confirmation bias, but there’s even more to it than that which I won’t get into. It’s true what you observed, but if you were to examine the ENTIRE set of people who went and got tested, sick or not, you would also see that there were people who initially showed up clinically sick, but tested negative; people who initially showed up clinically sick, and tested positive (as you observed); people who initially showed up clinically well, and tested (for example, to satisfy an employer’s requirement) positive; and, people who initially showed up clinically well, and tested negative. (The same permutation applies to the follow-ups). This is a perfectly expected outcome for a test that is not fit for purpose, like PCR. It’s what you’d expect from a test that gives random “hits.” However, if people have been primed to accept that there’s a contagious disease floating around and it’s called “Covid 19,” then people will tend to take a mental accounting of the test results that confirm that notion while dismissing or ignoring the tests that don’t. For example, for the people who initially showed up clinically sick, but tested negative, if you have a bias to believe the pandemic narrative, you would likely conclude, “oh, that person just had seasonal flu. I’ll just remove that from my mental bookkeeping.” But it would be just as plausible to conclude that the test that was used to make that determination is garbage and that it really doesn’t tell you anything one way or the other. That latter is what was known to be true by a small minority of analytical chemists from the beginning and is now becoming more common knowledge with the general public.
Imagine a test that supports a narrative of an invisible threat justifying unconstitutional powers as part of emergency all while collecting swabs of DNA for Human Genome Project to train AI systems that feed Biotech Mafia models & evergreen remnant revenue.. imagine?
If anyone bothered to read, they would have realized the number if cycles was far to high for accuracy from day one. Alex Berenson and Joseph Mercola reported this.
Thank you, Jon!
💪
First reaction? What else would anyone expect from a bunch of political thugs? Honesty - HA!
You can bet the farm or ranch that PCR will again be used during the next fake pandemic. You will be told you are positive for some wicked virus and that you are sick and need an mRNA injection, a mask, and lockdown. Even if you have not been ill and feel perfectly fine. Same lies, different virus.
However, there will be no virus to detect...it will once again be pure fantasy. The fact that the DOE redacted specific info paints the government (DARPA, DOD, HHS) guilty of attempted murder using mRNA poisons. The "national security" cloud is again an excuse to avoid telling the public the truth. But I'll speak of it...your government wants you dead and gone.
Not by many. Most of those ignorant enough to go there will be dead by the time the next PLANDEMIC arrives. The American People's next step will surely be REVOLT because we weren't dumb enough to fall for the last PLANDEMIC...
What else would anyone expect from a collective bunch of political thugs - honesty? HA! That's ALMOST funny... particularly when you think about them orchestrating the entire covid-crapola plandemic, murdering millions, and getting away with it despite laws already on the books against first degree, premediated murder. I think, they think, we don't recognize their traps - aka shell games.
We’re watching… 👀
It was very easy to find out about the test. The developer himself testified it as lab material and not meant to identify or diagnose. The box says it. Even nurses at the 'test' center told people it was unreliable. A documentary undercover showed how tests were handled. Elon Musk declared he went to test 4 times and tested twice positive and twice negative. It was a scam from before anything happened. It was set up, and everyone who has computer access could have known this. Why people prefer to listen to talking heads on TV is a mystery to me. I only trust what I have looked up for myself. Everyone should do that, not just listen to one source.
The only reason this administration would not indict the key players in this obvious crime is if they are also implicated.
Ain't that always the way of things?
Jon:
Your posts can raise questions: What if PCRs running at high amplification are dispositive only in so far as they demonstrate samples came from a living organism?
There’s something consistent in this type of military-medical regulatory security classification scheme in the COVID context. It’s a familiar info asymmetry from hostage-taking scenarios. Hostages, their loved ones, protectors of the peace and crises negotiators demand a Proof of Life. So, the PCR gives Proof of Life to those in and outside of government, at home and abroad.
Some find it especially concerning in this situation, because our government established the PCR as a theoretical method of illustrating ‘disease’ and health risk, as if ‘Proof’. And then they used PCR claims as if it was meaningful data to justify repeatedly subjecting everyone to a derivative of the thing they called a threat to life in a threatening situation. But regulators also directed everyone to think that people had to survive two weeks after the second of two shots before they were officially defined as being alive given their shot. And, authorities didn’t fully track that data for health purposes. Adverse effects of shots warranted voluntary reports by their doctors, who had no standards to allow them time to do it.
Does the PCR proof of life show us what the business of hostage taking is all about?
Maybe it’s an apt analogy if we sense that those released from their position as hostages, had suffered Stockholm syndrome, and continue to die suddenly now that they can be re- classified as free, counted in ‘excess all cause’ mortality data.
Public protectors and medical professionals do not want to traumatize anyone, so refuse to recognize or fully deal with the previous shots! So too, pathologists and researchers who differentiate types of damage in certain people due to taking certain kinds of shots, are not allowed to publish their data regardless of study techniques.
Bi-partisan leadership need not focus on those with Stockholm syndrome when there are sexier and more extreme things to debate, like Epstein files, Venezuelan boats and Greenland. COVID hostages who are just happy to be alive, seem ready to get the next advanced tech even if it doesn’t involve the familiar shot in the arm. They are likely the most ‘courageous’ and ‘willing’ to take a shot straight up the nose. After all, many who decried lower efficacy than desired in the original shots, have been told that things work better when delivered more directly into nasal mucous membranes where there’s theoretically more immune effects and a shorter distance to payload delivery into all other systems.
Proof of Life? Hostage takers might suggest nobody needs to be worried about PCR data or what’s redacted. After all, some don’t know what they have until it’s gone.
Be grateful for life.
The tests involved a sampling of nasal fluid high in white blood cells and therefor DNA.
Under the 2021 Covid Relief Act positive tests were sent through a federally-funded network of labs called SPHERES to national and international genetic databases.
News reports quoted directors of such databases as calling for increased sharing, and they began holding your DNA in the Public Domain with identifying information attached.
Along with all the DNA that was taken from migrant and asylum seekers at the border from 2017 through the present day, genetic databases have amassed millions of genetic samples of americans as well as foreigners.
The databases have not promised to destroy those samples.
What have they done with that genetic information?
Oddly, Kari Mullis died on 8/7/2019, 3 months before the "pandemic"
https://www.bitchute.com/video/eZN3xzhZdrcb
Yes, I always thought that was a planned death.
Those pcr tests could not differentiate covid from flu, yes?
Something seemed off about that test from the beginning. There were so many false readings, and it was being pushed on everyone. My guard went up just as it did when I heard the Covid jab was "95 effective." Ha! Give me a break!
Subhuman B. Gates bought the PCR company knowing it gave 95-99% false positives that would make more money for the subhuman, while he continued with his constant lying his whole wretched life!
The fearmongering through case counting was a useful side effect of the PCR. THAT 95% was the goal: https://www.arkmedic.info/p/the-pfizer-job
This is the first I heard that we relied on a Chinese digital code of the sequence, not a physical sample. Thank you.
But I'm unclear on something: Most people I know who tested did so because they felt sick (whether they had covid or a general flu or other viral infection) and that same person could test again at the end of a 10 day period and get a negative reading. So it can't just be genetic material the test was picking up, or the test would be positive again. Can you explain?
They could have tested a hedgehog or an orange and got a positive result one day and a negative result a few days later and back and forth. This is because PCR uses cycles to read (supposedly) genetic material and there was never an established baseline (or standard) for the number of cycles that were used across all testing. Some tests used 25 cycles and others 45 cycles...meaning results were all over the map. None of this from China was ever pre-tested or in any trial to discover the efficacy of these PCR tests.
They did in fact test a goat, a sheep and a paw-paw.
Goat and paw-paw sadly tested positive.
Sheep tested negative, and lived happily ever after...
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/5/3/tanzania-president-questions-coronavirus-kits-after-animal-test
Yes, I remember that!
A fair and excellent question. The short answer would be because of confirmation bias, but there’s even more to it than that which I won’t get into. It’s true what you observed, but if you were to examine the ENTIRE set of people who went and got tested, sick or not, you would also see that there were people who initially showed up clinically sick, but tested negative; people who initially showed up clinically sick, and tested positive (as you observed); people who initially showed up clinically well, and tested (for example, to satisfy an employer’s requirement) positive; and, people who initially showed up clinically well, and tested negative. (The same permutation applies to the follow-ups). This is a perfectly expected outcome for a test that is not fit for purpose, like PCR. It’s what you’d expect from a test that gives random “hits.” However, if people have been primed to accept that there’s a contagious disease floating around and it’s called “Covid 19,” then people will tend to take a mental accounting of the test results that confirm that notion while dismissing or ignoring the tests that don’t. For example, for the people who initially showed up clinically sick, but tested negative, if you have a bias to believe the pandemic narrative, you would likely conclude, “oh, that person just had seasonal flu. I’ll just remove that from my mental bookkeeping.” But it would be just as plausible to conclude that the test that was used to make that determination is garbage and that it really doesn’t tell you anything one way or the other. That latter is what was known to be true by a small minority of analytical chemists from the beginning and is now becoming more common knowledge with the general public.
Under which administration was this going on?
Biden I bet?
and TRUMP
It can’t be under 2 admins ?!?
What date was the memo issued
That’s the question
For sure, mass murdering liar that was paid billions for causing the deaths of hundreds of millions!
Wowsa, @jonfleetwood! This is quite the find. 😳
Imagine a test that supports a narrative of an invisible threat justifying unconstitutional powers as part of emergency all while collecting swabs of DNA for Human Genome Project to train AI systems that feed Biotech Mafia models & evergreen remnant revenue.. imagine?
If anyone bothered to read, they would have realized the number if cycles was far to high for accuracy from day one. Alex Berenson and Joseph Mercola reported this.