Test 1-2 testing 1-2 test.
Test 1-2 testy test test testy.
Bye.
While responding to the treatment, feel the beat down to your feet, and release what it takes to make it more relate.
I'm talking about soul vaccination.
Soul vaccination.
All across the nation.
Shout out to Left-Handed Monkey Wrench for that recommendation.
He's not there in the chat now, but I definitely saw him earlier today and that was one of the jams that he recommended.
So shout out to DJ Left-Handed Monkey Wrench.
Well done.
Bueller?
He's sick.
My best friend's sister's boyfriend's brother's girlfriend heard from this guy who knows this kid is going with the girl who saw Ferris pass out at 31 Flavors last night.
I guess it's pretty serious.
Thank you, Simone.
All right, well, Sirius, if they are getting more incisive legal victory than Aaron Seery or CHD, I'm actually not so surprised anymore.
That may have actually been part of the script, which really bothers me a lot.
But, you know, I'm going to remain optimistic that some of those people were good, just not all of them.
And that was the trick.
That's how they
they were absorbed early on.
And I'm going to explain that again today that I'm not making accusations of everyone, of course.
And so that's the trick, right?
I mean, these people step in front just when they need to, especially about specific things or during specific times or when you come up with specific ideas.
And after that, it's all smoke and mirrors.
especially when social media is pre-programmed to elevate these people and not you.
And more importantly, that they've agreed to elevate each other and not you.
And so each one of us has been guilty of this, actually, or not guilty of it, but subject to this in our own little social media bubbles.
Boy, if you're not working hard to find the replays of Mark and Housatonic Live on Rumble and on BitChute, you need to work a little harder.
He is posting them up there.
He is making some very hard-hitting
um ball advancing uh content lately so um we've gotten a lot of first downs because of Mark Kulak make sure that you follow him make sure you share his stuff on rumble um even his lego work is really worth sharing it's just it's it's really magical um how quickly he's developed the skills necessary to become a serious competitor um on an internet full of people who are making a living as lego builders
He seems to really have risen very quickly with his skill level, and I'm just really impressed at how, like, you know, multifaceted Mark is.
I think truth is good for kids.
We're so busy lying, we don't even recognize the truth no more in society.
We want everybody to feel good.
That's not the way life is.
But you can tell if someone's lying.
You know, you can sort of feel it in people.
And I have lied.
I'm sure I'll lie again.
Sorry.
I had to let that come.
I don't want to lie.
You know, I don't think I'm a liar.
I try not to be a liar.
I don't want to be a liar.
I think it's like really important not to be a liar.
Jonathan, who's going to talk about his latest distillation of what the pandemic means to society, to biology, to science, and to democracy, and the whole kind of idea of empiricism and integrity.
And then each of us, this incredible preeminent panel that we have, each one of you is going to get a chance to comment
It doesn't matter much at all what you believe about vaccines until we invent really important ones, you know, until we have a pandemic that's killing everyone, you know, and, you know, it's, it's not, it's, you know, measles plus, you know, okay, I can tolerate what you think about measles because, you know, not that many people die from it.
It's just a big hassle in the end.
But no, when, when we have this new pandemic that,
is, you know, got 75% mortality and... It's not... There'll be no pretense of being polite in the face of these beliefs.
It'll be a moral emergency, because it has to be.
Oh, man.
All these sliders.
I got the lap track right, at least.
Darn it.
So here we are again, another one trying to take another swing.
There's so many balls on the tee right now that I don't know what to swing at first, but we're gonna keep going.
Because we gotta keep doing this work.
That's what we gotta do.
We gotta show up and do the work.
I'm speaking on Saturday.
Yes, we're gonna hack away, indeed.
Hack away.
There's no need to yell there, Girl Rocks.
We are working hard right now.
This is probably gonna be my last 4 o'clock, I speak.
Perfect timing, in my humble opinion.
I am probably going to take the next two days off because of travel and because I need to prepare at some point for Saturday.
And so, oh no, this is not really there.
That's annoying.
But I can do this, I think.
Like that, right?
Yeah.
You can always make any suggestion you'd like for my talk.
Everybody's worried about what I'm gonna do.
I assure you that I'm not gonna do anything that would shoot my Myself or my family or this this work that I've this this record of integrity that I have That I have established I hope over the last many years that I'm not gonna do anything to shoot myself in the foot or ruin any of that even though the temptation is there I
It's not going to happen.
I'm going to try and get as many people who have never heard of me before to appreciate it.
Oh, girl rocks.
You have no idea.
Of course that's going to be in there, honey.
Don't worry about it.
I got you.
I got you, girl.
You know that's what I'm going to do.
That's the biology.
That's the biology that nobody wants to talk about because then they'd have to admit that they're being provided comfort by weaponized piles of money.
They'd have to admit that they've always known, they just haven't been seeing.
They haven't been showing.
And they've been playing for the people who are pushing this mythology right here.
So we got to, at the same time, we got to make sure that there is a, that we realize there is a history to be captured, a history to learn.
We don't have to assume that it's all been erased already.
There's plenty of it out there still.
Mark is working very hard to preserve it and organize it in such a way so you don't have to work so hard to find it and organize it.
And I hope that you'll take advantage of all that work he's done.
Maybe even grab yourself a backup copy of some of that stuff.
Because these charlatans are going to do everything they can to hold on to power.
They've had it since our parents.
And these guys inherited from their mentors as a lot of these guys behind the scenes and in the dissident movement have inherited from the same people.
The live streams are available and I'm sure it's going to be recorded.
I wouldn't make any worry about that.
But on the other hand, I would make a lot of effort to try and get ready to share it, record it, stream it, tweet it, etc.
Because it is going to be a very tricky maneuver.
We're going to have to thread the needle.
if we're gonna make gentle the life of this world, the life of our children as we transition out of this mythology, because the entire power structure of the Western world is based on this mythology.
And their entire play for moving into the future by governing us by this mythology is based on it staying intact.
And so if we're gonna make gentle the life of this world as Robert F. Kennedy Jr., sorry, Robert F. Kennedy, gotta get your history straight,
As Robert F. Kennedy so eloquently said, we're going to need to be very careful and thread that needle.
We're going to have to try very hard to get everyone to understand that if you look over to the left in this picture, you can see this little train there that's actually generating the perfect wave that this kid is learning to surf on.
And although he's learning to surf on a very cool wave, he shouldn't get distracted and realize that this is an artificial wave.
It's not a real wave.
And real waves are more complicated and less predictable.
And they don't go away from the shallow water.
They go toward the shallow water.
And so if your kids grow up on a social media wave that is false, and the wave goes away from the shallow water, and the wave is very perfect, and it's created by a coordinated group of liars,
then your kids are never really learning to surf at all.
And when they find out that the real waves go toward the shore, toward the coral reefs, and they're not as predictable as the one they trained on, oh boy, now we have a problem.
And I think that's where Gigaohm's Biola, Biola, oops, sorry, that screwed everything up there, I gotta, shoot, is that gonna work?
Oh, wow, wow, wow, wow, wow, wow, wow, wow, wow, wow, wow, wow.
Oh, there it came on, now we got it.
And so I'm attending in person, are you kidding me?
And so the strategy of staying focused on the biology, not taking the bait on social media and loving your neighbor really works well when the artificial wave is largely created by opinions between coordinated liars.
See how that works?
And so people are starting to learn this strategy and people are starting to spread the word about how well we can explain it.
And that's really great because slowly but surely, I think we're at like 145 subscribers.
which is extraordinary, and because I'm not putting anything up on Substack right now, I'm gonna try to get into the habit of that after this weekend.
I have like 80 subscribers on Substack that aren't getting what their subscription should be getting them, and so I need to turn around and do that as well.
I apologize to all of those people out there, and you know who you are.
Sorry, I have a very tiny cup of coffee that will not last in terms of temperature, and so I'm still trying to drink it while it can still burn my throat.
There is a paradigm shift happening right now, and it's happening very quickly.
The sudden revelation for some of us that Pierre-Corey
was involved in a George Floyd expert witness something-something has really enabled a lot of people to see deeply and to really say, wait a minute, wait a minute, hold the phone.
And so I want to get right into it.
Ladies and gentlemen, this is GigaOM Biological, a high-resistance, low-noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
the the
Good point, I think it's 4 p.m., whatever time zone South Dakota Rapid City would be in, so that's probably not Eastern Standard Time indeed.
Hello, ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the show.
It's GigaOM Biological, a high-resistance, low-noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
It's the 12th of June, 2024, I am again coming to you live from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania in the back of my garage.
It's 1.33 in the afternoon, the sun is shining, it's warm, I wanna get outta here.
Um, but, uh, we got to get this done and I think, um, we can very, uh, let's say efficiently move the ball significantly forward today.
Um, building on what we did yesterday, yesterday's stream was absolutely.
I stand by it as a really excellent take on the material that was provided by Martin Neal and Jonathan Engler and how they wrote it up on Substack.
And I wanna follow up on that in a more brief version so that the people that are involved in it and the people that I focused on can see it in a brief version because again, a lot of these people, including Jonathan Engler and others, complain that nobody's gonna watch a two-hour video and it's no use sharing.
My two-hour video, so I'm gonna try and make this one just a little bit shorter I don't have any more hope that somebody's gonna start sharing it or somebody that wasn't watching before is gonna watch now Because these people again, it's no use sharing Jay's videos because nobody watches a two-hour video anyway
Although it is hard to explain how Brett Weinstein and Joe Rogan and all these other people that make two hour videos seem to do fine.
But whatever, who am I to question?
I don't know how social media works.
If you want to see me in person, you can come to South Dakota, Rapid City on the 15th and 16th, that's this weekend.
And you will see Jonathan J. Cooley in person.
You'll see exactly how tall and lanky of a,
a skinny bazoon, is that what he called me?
As a skinny bazoon I am.
You can meet the skinny bazoon for yourself.
And we can discuss in person why intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
You can even argue with me in person about why you think transfection in healthy humans wasn't always criminally negligent.
Or even maybe argue about the particular papers that make RNA cannot pandemic a bit of an exaggeration, but I doubt it.
I doubt anybody's gonna show up
and argue that we really do need to fear free-range RNA molecules, or that the previous vaccine schedule was fine, or that weaponized piles of money have nothing to do with it.
But maybe they will.
I don't know.
Maybe they will.
Oh yeah, that's right.
I'm doing it that way now, which should help.
Yes, this should help.
Wait, come on.
End, exit, show.
And then I can open this one.
I tried to split the show in half today so that we might get a better result.
And now I'm so awkward in changing that it actually is just as good if I would have just stopped and started one.
Sorry about that.
So we're going to go here.
And so again, it doesn't matter how you say it.
I just like somebody to take these ideas and run with them.
You don't even necessarily need to say you got them for me, although it would be nice because I'm not getting anything by fighting this fight here, other than the support that I get from people like Greg.
and Steve and William and a few other people.
So the argument that I'm making is pretty cogent, okay?
And it's pretty solid.
What I'm arguing is, is that somewhere up there in the no virus group, there are meddlers.
I don't know who they are.
But those meddlers kept the good guys in that group from being able to adequately project the message that they murdered people and lied about it.
And instead, that group of people, wittingly or unwittingly,
you know, despite their best efforts, ended up being represented on the internet and being represented to other people in the dissident movement, has staking their claim exclusively on FOIAs about isolation and purification and arguments about whether or not virus culture and virus cultures exist.
And whoever those meddlers are, the people inside of those chat groups and those discords and those telegram groups are the ones that need to figure that out.
Because I didn't engage with them.
And when I tried to engage with them, they burnt me as quick as some of these people did.
And so I don't know who all the good guys are up there, but I assume, because there were good guys in all the groups that I've been in, including Panda, including CHD, and I assume including ICANN, and a lot of the people that more or less follow this idea that there are no viruses, they got there with good intention.
But essentially, because this is a military operation being executed from an international perspective,
These cognitive bubbles were created, and only now, in retrospect, is it easy enough for me to point out how they were constructed and what the limited spectrum of debate that they trapped people within was.
For the no-virus people, it was this thing about the semantics of isolation, purification, and culture, and insisting that anybody that talked to them in the first couple years would only want to argue about that.
And they had their reflection in people over here who knew already in March 2020, maybe even February 2020, that it was Andrew Kaufman that needed opposing.
And that was, from my experience, was Kevin McCarron in Japan.
And so Kevin McCarran in Japan decided that Andrew Kaufman in America was the number one no virus person that needed opposing in March of 2020.
I don't know why, I didn't know any of these people.
And in retrospect, I'm making the argument that it's pretty obvious to me now, given all their interactions with me, all the private messages that I've had to archive, all of the private chats that I've had to archive, all of these stupid things that I've wasted my time archiving now show me very clearly that this was an orchestrated Lollapalooza of liars all along.
And you were forced to take a side.
And if you took any of their sides, you were never going to escape.
And that's how they planned to mislead the young around the world.
And it has succeeded so far because there are very few adults who are actually willing to admit that anybody that rose to any level of prominence on social media was very likely part of this operation.
Punt out.
And in Nederland, that means period.
Nothing.
That's it.
Stop.
Full stop.
If you rose to 200,000 followers over the course of speaking out over the last three or four years, it is almost with certainty that you are part of this charade misleading the young about the existence of pandemic potential in nature and in laboratories and not
adequately strong enough questioning this fundamental assumption upon which all of these non-governmental organizations are based, upon which all of these government organizations like the FDA and CDC and NIH and NIDA are all based.
They all exist because of this illusion that none of these people are willing to ask exactly how deep does this go.
And that's by design.
It's not possible that these people have woken up, but just don't want to wake up all the way, unless it's by design.
And I have been meddled with by a lot of these people.
A lot of these people have spent years trying to meddle with me, telling me different stories, leading me down different tracks, telling me that we should argue against this person together, and then et cetera, et cetera.
It's always a group of them because, as I've tried to say over and over again, if two people agree to lie to you, it's very hard to figure it out.
That's why surprise birthday parties are so surprising.
That's why when my two sons decide to lie to their little sister about anything together, it is very, very hard for her to know.
That's why when parents agree to lie about Santa Claus, it's pretty hard for kids to figure it out.
And what I'm suggesting is very simple, that these people have been coordinating their actions for over four years, absorbing people that they need to through comfort or coercion.
And they have been coordinating their act around the world to make sure that nobody usefully questions the need to respect the dangers of free-range RNA with the right number of cleavage sites.
And so that's where this all stems from, is that my message is being absorbed and misrepresented by all of these people for four years now.
And it started already in 2020 with Drastic.
And in 2020 with Kevin McCairn and Paul Cottrell.
I've got four and a half years of experience, four and a half years of messages, four and a half years of Zoom recordings, four and a half years of notes.
I'm not shooting from the cuff here.
I'm not giving away anything that I have because I don't feel I need to.
I'm sure that I'm telling the truth.
That's why I don't need notes.
I don't have to remember anything.
There's a pattern here.
These people will not address this.
What I have for almost two years now called the faith in a novel virus.
All of them will not question it.
They'll get close, they'll pretend, but they don't question it.
Absolutely do not question it.
And most of them have not questioned it from the very beginning.
Kevin McKernan, Kevin McCairn, Paul Cottrell, George Webb,
Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Robert Malone, Kevin McKernan, all these people, many of them put in place very early to question it very, well, very, not question it at all, really.
Kevin McKernan says that it could have been going for 80 or 40 or 80 years in some backwoods place in China where there was no sequencing.
And still, then, it's not a novel virus.
But I mean, it's kind of novel, but it's not really as novel as they say.
Sure is killing a lot of people though.
And so I feel I need to repeat this for the cheap seats to make sure that people hear it.
But I am saying that Kevin McKernan is very likely working for them because his loyalties aren't with my children's
children and with small town America, it's with the Department of Energy and the people that brought his family multi-generational wealth.
That's why he was on a podcast in 2024 explaining the meaning of novel or not novel and already getting us to funnel into this Scooby-Doo mystery of a lab leak or a novel virus by hinting that, well, if it was a lab leak, I would need some pretty dispositive evidence to show me that or some shit like that.
And then in May, a month later, he's on to clarify exactly how do PCR tests work.
And is it the cycle count or, you know, what is it?
I mean, you're in the PCR space.
So I've got a friend in the PCR space.
I feel so cool.
Maybe you can tell us a little bit, Kevin, about how this is going, because I used to work for Monsanto in the World Bank.
I got no clue about how viruses work.
Take it away, Kevin.
And then he came back on in December.
A continuation of the same shit.
Talking about whether the new variants matter or not and yadda yadda yadda.
Wasn't he also at some point talking about they need to test the weed because they're afraid the weed might be spreading the coronavirus so he wants to get ahead of that ball so he's already testing for coronavirus and weed?
And then lo and behold, years later, the dude's still a thought leader, still a thought leader, now being promoted as a recent speaker in front of the Senate about the double-stranded DNA contamination in the shot, doing podcasts with CHD and Mary Holland and Brian Hooker about the DNA in the shot.
And even when I told them that, you know, you're amplifying a meddler, they didn't care.
Mary Holland didn't care.
Mary Holland's the one that fired me.
Mary Holland came right back to CHD as soon as I was hired by Brian and the rest of them.
And she tried everything she could.
Every excuse to call Brian about me, anytime anybody ever called.
anybody ever called to complain about my podcast, even though my podcast is my podcast, and I didn't say anything bad about anybody.
I'm just trying to say that the vaccine schedule is criminal, and I'm confused why nobody will say anything about it.
And then you can reflect on, yeah, you were on that podcast with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., but I play it in the beginning all the time now, right after Tucker Carlson says he thinks it's really important not to be a liar, because I think they're liars.
If you listen to Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
introduce me in that podcast, that's just an ego attack.
It's just trying to disarm me with compliments that are clearly not about me.
I never talked about intelligence agencies and how important my idea is for democracy and all this other shit.
No offense, Bobby, but maybe he's just
being directed by Malone?
I don't know.
I mean, Malone is the only one in that picture that supposedly worked for DITRA.
And at the beginning of the pandemic was actually bragging about DITRA and the DoD as we or something like that.
And so I admit that I was confused after this, I just was blown away by this.
I was still not aware that that was Epi Girl.
I wasn't aware that this lady was as mean as she is.
And I definitely wasn't aware that nine days later, this guy would say that he didn't know who the hell I was and pull his hand away.
So, I mean, it's a strange place that we're in because, you know, these people are manipulating us behind the scenes.
And if you get invited to a Zoom meeting and these four people, and three of them are pretending to be really interested in what you have to say, and the one lady up there in the upper left corner doesn't know what she's doing there, then from the perspective of myself, it seems like Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
has given me a
a real chance to step up to the mic and talk to some really important thought leaders.
He gave me a whole seven minutes.
And so that's in the context of this statement.
That's in the context of this statement that I'm suggesting to you that adults are being manipulated like this.
that if Steve Kirsch and Kevin McKernan go on to a Zoom podcast with a host and with Byron Bridle, Byron Bridle can be made to feel like people are listening to him and that these people are trustworthy and that they're gonna go on and take what I've learned and score a touchdown with it.
And as long as Kevin McKernan and Steve Kirsch agree to lie to him,
or agree to lie to somebody like John Bodwin, then they can control them.
John Bodwin has proof in his book that they murdered people and lied about it.
But do Steve Kirsch or Kevin McKernan ever sell his book as evidence that there was no pandemic, that there wasn't even a pandemic when it started?
Do they sell that at all?
Do they even mention John Baldwin anymore?
Or is John Baldwin's time in the sun now over because all that work he did has just been spent?
It's too bad that John can't see it.
That what's really happening here is that these people have absorbed and actually intentionally stepped in front of many, many, many people.
That's the only way to explain why somebody like Brett Weinstein would announce to his podcast audience, some guy from Canada was gonna start a podcast with somebody like Jay Bhattacharya and call it illusion of consensus.
When he was in a signal chat with me,
in 2021, in the beginning of 2022, learning all of this stuff, me begging him to listen to me, but not realizing why wouldn't he listen to me?
He's too busy.
He's got no time.
Oh, I see.
Okay.
Then why am I in a signal chat with you?
I was stupid, but I'm not stupid anymore.
And since I'm not stupid anymore, I can actually see the alien very well.
And I can help you to see it too.
Because these people are stepping in front of
Brian hooker They are stepping in front of del big tree.
Most likely they are stepping in front of this lady from the NVIC With absolute certainty, of course, they're stepping in front of that Jason guy from Canada or in front of this Randy guy from Canada Of course, they're stepping in front of them And now these two guys are gonna have a useful debate about what it means to be God after that guy converted to Christianity a month ago really
That's where we are?
And so I have been calling these people out.
Now, at the same time that I've been working so hard to show people how these people should not have been the same people all the time, all the time, at every international COVID summit, at every international speak out thing, it should never have been that way.
It should have seemed organic.
It should have been organic.
It should have been better than having Team DITRA populating these meetings all the time.
But that's the way it is.
And I'm calling it out now because I have selfies with all these people that say, wow, I can't really evaluate the biology that you do because I'm not that kind of biologist, but I really love what you do.
Stop lying.
And they've been doing that to me for four and a half years.
The actual physical manifestation of that bullshit lying scheme is this book.
I got paid for a whole year to contribute to this book.
And yes, I am burning that bridge, but I'm burning it because it matters right now.
There is no going back.
And I don't wanna go back.
This is part of the illusion, and I've been saying it since the book came out.
If you wanna argue nicely about it, you say that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
wanted to create a historical document of all the stupid shit that people said.
That's the best case scenario.
And so it's a good book because there's some stupid shit that I said in here too.
But it was a very elaborate operation to allow me to work on this book so that they might be able to convince me to tell this story and to try to earn a living telling this story.
Kind of like on a silver platter, right?
I mean, if your name was listed first in the acknowledgements as, what are the words he uses?
This book would not have been possible without the expertise and invaluable insights provided by Jonathan J. Cooey, PhD.
I'm not taking that out of context.
I just read the first sentence of the second paragraph of the page on acknowledgements.
So I guess what I put in this book must be pretty important, right?
So only six entries in the index.
Robert Malone on the back of the book says, this book is the most comprehensive historic summary and indictment of the history of the United States biowarfare defensive program ever written, summarizing an amazing sweep of untold censored history.
The Wuhan coverup offers a case study demonstrating the consequences of the situational ethical slide that often occurs when a massive administrative bureaucracy fuses with an intelligence community.
Meryl Nass says, were coronavirus weapons so seductive that they blurred the line between friend and enemy?
Bobby Kennedy lays out the facts in a book you won't put down.
She's listed as a biowarfare epidemiologist and anthrax expert.
Stop lying!
Hmm.
This is Peter McCullough.
An extraordinary elucidation of a singularly dark and terrible enterprise, the Wuhan Cover-Up is a meticulous work of scholarship that reads like a thriller and is designed to be one of the most significant books, destined, sorry, to be one of the most significant books in history.
That's pretty kick-ass.
If this becomes one of the most significant books in history, I guess my name is pretty much stamped in stone somehow.
Now, all kidding aside, I want you to take very seriously how significant it is that I'm not telling that story.
And in fact, I am trying to testify that I was not telling this story at the end of the writing of this book.
And that I succeeded in making an argument that the real story is that they lied because RNA can't do that.
And everybody that participated in the writing and publishing of this book at some point became aware of that in 2023.
And if they say that they weren't aware of it, then that means that they didn't listen or didn't bother to try and understand the times when I explained it in Zoom meetings.
I want it all out on the table right now because if I get run over by a car tomorrow, I need my kids to know this stuff too.
And since I can't write a book, I mean, I'm just, I can't do it.
I don't, I don't, I don't write.
I just make two hour videos that nobody watches.
And so this limited spectrum of debate, it's very important that you see how it is created.
It is created by these people traveling the world and including somebody like me in their travels or in their, in their little meetings, like the Red Pill Conference.
And as long as there's enough people at the Red Pill Conference to say other stuff, then maybe I won't have such an impact.
Now, I'm not suggesting that the Red Pill Conference is the same as these international COVID summits.
It's certainly not the same as this group that spoke in front of the Senate.
I'm just using it as an example of what could be.
And the way that anybody in my position goes into a meeting like that is to assume the worst.
I mean, the worst would be, right, that G. Edward Griffin is somehow or another, has chosen life over death, and is allowed to say what he knows exactly what he can say, and he is risking something by giving me a platform and counting on me to do it right, and that's awesome.
It's also possible that he's allowed to do it because he's, you know, all these things are possible if he's allowed to, if they're allowed to insert certain people into the Red Pill Conference, then maybe he's allowed to get away with it.
I don't know.
I don't think that G. Edward Griffin is working for them.
I'm saying that through very, very careful, coordinated lying,
Even somebody as you would assume very awake as G. Edward Griffin probably has one or more people that are in his circle that report out and get compensated very well for it and are very careful to only report out so that they, you know, I don't have any, I just leak a little information here and there.
And I don't want G. Edward Griffin to hear this or you to send it to him and say, oh, you got moles.
I just want everybody to be very, very,
realistic.
That when somebody approaches you on the internet, somebody that you've never spent any time with, and approaches you about a very specific thing to do with something very important to this operation, you shouldn't err on the side of, well, I guess I'll give them the benefit of the doubt.
They must be a good person, just mean well.
That's why I find it very funny when people send me emails and they get mad if I don't react or if I react very incredulously because I don't know you.
How many emails do you think I get a day when I open my mouth every day on the internet about this stuff?
Now, what I want you to see is that this limited spectrum of debate which descends from this idea of Edward Bernays that the conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions is a must for a democratic rule.
And the fact is that they attribute bad motives to me now.
That's all they're doing.
That's all they have left.
So that's why there's a lot of silence now.
The best example we've seen is Debunk the Funk lately.
Zuby and him arguing was kind of this train thing.
But I wanted to put this warning here before I go on to explain the virology part for Jeff to be able to clip.
Don't forget that part of what they do when they do this coordinated lying is that they wave you to come over and they say, hey, come on, help us stop this train.
We need your help.
That's perhaps the biggest illusion and the one that's most important to understand that I've never
been able to enunciate until now, but using the same video, what I want you to imagine that this guy right here sees you standing there waiting for the train.
And then he looks at you and says, Hey man, could you help me?
And you've seen him do it already.
So you think, yeah, I guess he needs some help.
And so he says, you're going to grab on when I say grab it and then grab that car and just pull backwards on it.
And we'll stop the train together.
And now the more people that he's able to convince to help him,
then the easier it will be for him to get one more person to help because he's already got five guys that have agreed that, well, we're stopping the train with him.
He asked us for his help, for help.
And so we're helping him.
By their actions, they are creating the illusion of consensus.
They don't even have to say anything.
They just have to be standing there and help him stop the train once.
And even if they have no idea that they're not doing it, he's already got them.
So when he turns to the next person and says, hey, can you help us?
When Robert Malone turns to you and says, hey, can you help us?
When Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
says, hey, can you help us?
You don't even know who knows that they're doing the illusion.
You might think, oh, but I'm very pessimistic.
Everybody at CHD knows it's bullshit.
No, no, no, no, no.
Most of the people at CHD think they are really contributing to stopping and starting the train.
Most people working on this problem think they are stopping and starting the train by paying attention to social media and replying to the right people and promoting the right people on social media.
They think they're helping.
That's part of the illusion of social media.
Come on, you got to get into this argument with us.
And so I start out very suspicious when everybody, anybody approaches me from social media to help me.
My email is available on the web.
Several of my emails are available on the web.
So it's very strange to me when somebody makes contact through Twitter and insists on having long conversations in Twitter DMs.
And the thing that struck me as odd is that a lot of the people that have meddled with me, actually a lot of them,
who have meddled with me have meddled with me through and on Twitter, starting from Drastic, the group, which is just a Twitter chat group.
And it occurred to me that there could be super users on Twitter that can read other people's chats.
Maybe you can even share your private chats with other super users.
And so a very easy way for people to coordinatedly lie to people on Twitter would be to engage in DMs that other people can see but you're not aware they can see.
And since I've copied all these DMs and been watching them, the patterns sometimes seem to be kind of obvious that people contact me about the same thing at the same time when they don't need to or shouldn't have.
And so I want to give you a reflection of what can happen or what might have happened and shake the pan, so to speak, the gold.
panning analogy and hopefully the good guys will stay at the bottom because you know that's heavy gold and the rocks that we don't want will slide out the top of the pan.
The Virology review that I talked about yesterday started with this introduction on Claire Craig.
Claire Craig is the co-chair of a group called Heart over in the UK and I've
I'm basically ready to already say that I think at least that group is not accomplishing what they want to accomplish.
And maybe Claire Craig is part of the reason why.
She was on the Corman-Jorston report in 2020, and anybody that was on that report was either being absorbed
or doing the absorbing.
There's no other way to look at that paper because that paper didn't usefully accomplish anything other than make people feel like they were speaking out, but actually they weren't.
And so the example on that paper that I would be most focused on would be Thomas Binder and Mike Yeadon were probably two people
and they were, that were outspoken very early.
And so a way to absorb them into a group and get them to feel as though they were being heard was to get them to participate in this Corman-Jorston report that Kevin McKernan and some of these other people were on.
That's what I'm hypothesizing now.
And so if she was a good guy, then I don't think she would have risen to have 200,000 followers.
And so my conclusion is that she's not a good guy.
And it lines up with her behavior here very recently on June 8th.
She says, you can believe there was a virus and you can believe that virus killed people.
You can believe gain of function played a role and none would contradict whatever Alan says here.
In fact, it's all easier when a virus is spreading.
And that really, that really bothered me.
And so I called her out and then a bunch of people got mad and said, no, Claire's great.
And there's lots of different opinions at heart.
We don't need a lot of different opinions anymore.
And so I tried to look at it a little more closely.
And again, I'll remind you that the dude that I tagged here in this tweet, Jonathan Engler, is this guy.
He's the co-chair of Heart, and I know him from Panda, and I know him from him DMing me on Twitter since August of 2023.
Before that, we had no communication.
And then when he decided to start communicating with me, he started communicating with me by a DM on Twitter.
Again, my default is, is when you start there, it's already a red flag.
But he didn't know that.
And I can give away that hint now because I don't, I think this is, we're nearing a landslide now where all the hints can be useful to you too.
But anybody that communicates primarily through Twitter with you, you might as well dismiss them right now.
And I think you can do that without losing anything.
And so the reason why this bothered me again is because I'm making the argument for a long time now.
that what really matters to these people is what's perceived to be true.
And they've been using that to their advantage for decades.
And so for her to so casually in 2024 say what amounts to bullshit, pisses me off because she's got 200,000 followers and she probably shouldn't.
And the reason why she shouldn't have them is because she says things like that.
Or you could flip it around and say the reason why she does have 200,000 followers is because precisely she says that stuff.
And so I was disappointed that they defended her.
I was disappointed that they went to bat for somebody who has as sketchy a background as being a 100,000 Genomes Project person, a pathologist, and a diagnostic pathologist, which means she does a lot of testing,
And she's worked on AI and cancer diagnosis.
I mean, I just, I don't know what to tell you other than that's just, that's a stupid pile of red flags.
Now remember that she has really not been censored and is risen through social media about as quick as John Campbell.
And so here's a video from YouTube that I just pulled down really quick to give you an idea of who this person was two and a half years ago so that we don't have to pull any punches here.
Now, testing itself can fail.
Every test involves a compromise.
You have to choose, do I want to find every possible case, or do I only want to find the definite cases?
And at the beginning of an epidemic, when cases are growing, over-diagnosing a few people is acceptable.
But at peak deaths, you have to change strategy.
You change strategy instead of focusing on the individual,
What is this?
Wait, what?
I'm gonna play it again.
Now, testing itself can fail.
Every test involves a compromise.
You have to choose, do I want to find every possible case, or do I only want to find the definite cases?
And at the beginning of an epidemic, when cases are growing, over-diagnosing a few people is acceptable.
But at peak deaths, you have to change strategy.
You change strategy.
Instead of focusing on the individual, you look at the population.
Instead of trying to diagnose every possible case, you want to find the definite cases, and you have to change your laboratory strategy.
So you may have heard people talk about restaurants and say that there are three things restaurants can do, but they can only do two of them well.
You can have fast food, cheap food, or high-quality food.
Well, it's the same with laboratories, but the three things are high volume of tests, high speed of tests, or quality tests.
How about natural leak, a lab leak, or no virus at all?
How many different times is she going to flash the number three and a triangle in front of us?
She was a spokesperson for them.
She's arguing for the testing and she's not usefully changing her position at all.
If this is the bullshit she says three days ago.
So you're right.
I'm a little irate.
I'm a little irate, but it's not irate erratic.
It's very, very consistent.
This is in no way usefully questioning the faith.
And I don't think any of these people mean to usefully question the faith.
And it's starting to get frustrating to me because in parallel to this, at the same time, over the last few weeks and months on Twitter, these two guys have been trying to get me to write something with them about the Scooby-Doo, and then maybe to argue to Kevin McKernan what clones are and aren't.
And I balked on both of them.
I didn't trust them.
I'm sorry, but I didn't trust them because they contacted me through Twitter.
And because when we were supposed to write something, they didn't do anything.
I just continued to annotate and continued to drop in new papers.
And this is what this one means.
This is what that one means.
And it was crickets, nobody doing anything, no comments, nothing.
So I stopped, that was the second time.
And then suddenly these two guys decided to say, hey, we wrote this virus origins and gain or claim of function research.
We think we found a really clever title, claim of function.
Maybe you could read it and give us your thoughts.
And now I want to be very honest here, while at the same time sort of doing something that people get pissed about, but I'm sorry, this isn't for you, this isn't for me, this is for my kids and for my grandkids.
So I don't really care if I show just a little bit of the messages that I get from some of these people on Twitter.
I'm sorry, but I don't care.
And so according to this summary, it seems to me, I'm gonna get the buzz away.
It seems to me that Neil and Engler, Virology 101 doesn't have an easy explanation.
It seems like that's what they think.
And so the summary, I'm just gonna read it here and you just get what you get out of it.
Hopefully I can read it somewhat cohesively.
A thorough review of the available evidence suggests that the emergence of a novel engineered virus is the least likely explanation for the event known as the COVID pandemic.
Notably,
The discovery of novel viruses is a function of how determined we are to find them.
The more we look, the more we find, suggesting that the attribution of novelty to a virus is as much the result of a politicized process rather than something based on the objective analysis of its properties.
That's basically Kevin McKernan on April 24th, 2020.
The features of SARS-CoV-2 do not appear as special or as unique as claimed.
Again, that's Kevin McKernan, April 24, 2020.
I showed you that earlier in a slide.
There is no evidence that the many and complex hurdles in front of deliberately engineering viruses to become more pathogenic or transmissible in humans have ever been overcome.
I think they mean gain of function is a myth.
The theory that there was a long-standing but hitherto undetected virus endemic in animal and possibly human reservoirs is difficult, if not possible, to falsify.
I think they mean we don't have any data on the pre-existing background signal.
before the pandemic started.
I think that's what they mean there, but they're not saying it very well.
And then there are other explanations which could explain the sudden and rapid global appearance and spread of a specific sequence than the spread of a novel virus.
There are other explanations which could explain the sudden and rapid
and rapid global appearance and spread of a specific sequence than the spread of a novel virus.
The available virological and epidemiological evidence does not adequately support either the lab leak or the wet market theories for the origin of the virus.
Therefore, we suggest it would be more apt to refer to claim of function than gain of function research.
So I'm still not sure what their point is.
I think what they mean is that a lab leak of a gain of function virus is not the best evidence, which I think is what they say at the beginning there.
A thorough review of the available evidence suggests.
that the emergence of a novel engineered virus is the least likely explanation for the event known as COVID.
So they're actually taking a stand on whether it was a lab leak or natural, and not saying that they don't think it's natural until the very bottom, where they don't really say it, but they say, therefore, we suggest it would be better to change it from gain of function to claim of function.
I'm confused as to what they've accomplished here.
Virological research with the intention of enhancing pathogenicity is nevertheless unethical and unnecessary and as such should cease.
But they say right here that there's no good evidence that they can do it.
So if they can't do it, why do they need to stop?
Why wouldn't you instead say that if they can't do it, then what you're accusing them of, it is lying.
This is true even though we believe the evidence strongly supports the hypothesis that the COVID pandemic was an iatrogenic phenomenon and was not caused by a novel and deadly virus.
I mean, I can't stress enough how frustrating it is that these guys have been bothering me for months, telling me that I had to write something.
telling me that nobody could understand my videos and no one will watch them because they're too long.
And then they write this because after this comes pages and pages of bullshit that doesn't clarify what they're saying here, which is not very clear in this regard.
If there was, there actually was a function gained by the virus.
It was the power to help trick humanity into a dramatic,
act of self-harm.
So they're actually not even questioning the existence of the virus if there was actually a function gained by the virus.
They are committed to nothing.
They believe nothing.
Therefore they understand nothing or they believe they understand nothing or something
And so if we go all the way past the subscribe here, leave a comment here, don't forget to subscribe and send your email.
There's like five or six of those all through the article.
You finally get to the bottom where they talk something about what I was saying.
Now, remember, if we go back here.
The features of SARS-CoV-2 do not appear to be special or unique.
Well, that's their unique insight after we're reading so many papers.
They really distilled it down into something useful, didn't they?
And then there's no good evidence that the many and complex hurdles in front of deliberately engineering viruses to become more pathogenic or transmissible in humans have been overcome.
Oh, they didn't steal gain-of-functionism mythology from me and turn it into that bullshit.
They would never do that.
Why would they do that?
Jay's theory is limited to this stupid shit that we summarize right here.
Right down here, you know, intentional spread of non-infectious clones.
stop lying these two guys i'm sorry but you gotta stop lying you can't tell me that after all this time of listening and talking and seeing me present at panda and arguing with me for months in our dms and twitter that you don't understand it any better than this but i'm gonna give you the benefit of the doubt because you put so much damn work into this it's kind of pathetic
So I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt.
I'm going to give you a little lesson here.
First of all, let's review what the basic ridiculous ideas that you've tried to distill down to, and one of them, just one half of it, you attribute to me.
You disingenuous couple of chumps.
Pre-existing endemicity.
Imagine stealing a march on the science and discovering a coronavirus already endemic.
So this was the paragraph we discussed yesterday has essentially accepting viruses, accepting virology, accepting how we test for them, accepting how we track them and accepting how we sequence them, but just imagining that somebody found one and then lied about it.
You know, like the first four times that they said they found a human coronavirus were missed opportunities.
If just one of the times that they found a coronavirus between 2006 and now, they would have lied about it and said, oh, it's spreading.
They could have already done a pandemic a long time ago.
And this is the first time they finally decided to do it.
That's what the first paragraph is.
That's how, that's how, dang it.
The second paragraph, intentional spread of non-infectious clones.
If we set aside the preexisting endemicity,
Again, all elaborate concepts that are wholly based in RNA virology being largely right, which these guys apparently accept because they've written pages and pages and read so many papers that they're sure it's right now.
And however you could clone it so that it contains novel and deadly looking features, but you don't care so much what its functional features are apart from that, because symptoms will be non-differentiated from other respiratory viruses.
So this is also a really stupid, complicated story that will never convince anybody that Jonathan Cooey's got a good idea here.
It's exactly the opposite.
The whole article is in exactly the opposite.
And then to send this to me and say, hey, we had tipped you here.
Come on, guys.
If you can't see that this is people that have been wasting my time since August and July of 23, just because they wanted me to write something that they could say, see, Jonathan basically accepts virology when I don't.
I don't basically accept it, even though that's what they tried to do with this book.
And everybody who helped publish this book knows damn well that this is exactly what I thought when this book was still not in existence, when the text was still changeable.
And that's why there's a quote on page 441 that says, they didn't even need a virus.
Now, why am I upset about this?
Because there's now gonna be this drama, and I wanna make sure you understand that if there is a drama, I already told them weeks ago.
On May 31st, 2024, I sent a message to Jonathan Engler on Twitter, which I do not consider privileged communications because that place is owned by a shithead named Elon Musk.
And so when you communicate with me on Twitter, I assume you're a meddler.
Just so you know, if you wanna fake me out, the first thing you gotta do is start with frickin' email.
So I said to him on Twitter, hey, I sent this to Martin.
I said Marty here, but I didn't mean to.
Martin being Professor Martin Neal, the other guy that wrote this review that I hate.
I sent this to Martin, and this is what I sent to Martin.
It says, I didn't get a chance to do anything but skim it.
I'll be honest, this is the review that everyone wanted me to do.
Go to their books and their papers and tell everyone what's there.
No thanks, that's not the answer.
That's the trap we are currently in.
The no-virus crew can jump on this, and they will.
I'm sorry I didn't help you, but this isn't the review that the world needs, and it is a review that someone needed to write so that they would stop asking me to do it.
Instead, I will use your work as a basis to teach what I have come to understand as the truth.
It is a well-written review.
Welcome to where I was almost four years ago.
Now you have to reread those papers with a better eye and head for what the methods used to achieve the understanding outlined in your review and see that the experiments don't allow you to draw the conclusions that are in the field's virology.
So I didn't say that quite right, but I'm reading it accurately.
And now I'm saying this to Jonathan.
So he asked me to look at it.
It's not the review I need to write.
What you've written is the review I thought we needed in 2020.
It's not the review everyone needs now, but it needed doing.
Anyone in academia could have done this in 2020.
That's the frustrating thing for me four years later.
Annie Malone or Rose or Corey or Wolf, they all could have done it, but they're liars.
And so just to make sure, you see, he says, thank you.
And he says, you make some very cogent points there.
But a week and a half later, the same guy says to me, have you cross promoted that and this on gain of function?
We wrote with no help from anyone and had to learn ROTS to be able to write it.
Is he pretending that he didn't ask me to read it?
Is he pretending that one week ago, I didn't tell him that it was bullshit?
Welcome to where I was in 2020.
I did this on my bike.
Did I promote it?
I told him a week ago, I wasn't gonna promote it.
I didn't wanna help him with it.
I thought it was stupid, but it needed to be written.
Now he's asking me a week later, have you promoted it?
Nobody else has tackled this in writing.
Pad yourself on the back a little bit, Jonathan.
So enough of the public criticism, please.
Now I repeated myself a week and a half later.
This is a review that anyone could have written in 2020.
I don't think your virology review has helped anyone but the virus narrative meddlers, really.
Your essay didn't acknowledge enough of the existing skepticism that preceded the pandemic to be dangerous or effective at breaking anyone free.
What I mean there is you could have gave a hat tip to farewell to virology.
You could have given a hat tip to all the people that fought against the illusion of treatment during the AIDS epidemic.
But instead he started with fields virology.
Using their methodology textbooks, mythology, excuse me, using their mythology textbooks to discuss their ideas will not, won't free us.
I have been trying to get people to usefully challenge these ideas.
That essay does nothing for that.
That's why I won't promote it and why I didn't write a word with you.
It made me deeply wonder why you wrote it, honestly.
All that reading without the requisite background to evaluate the claims?
Really?
When I was helping you guys write a review about virology and the use and definition of clones?
We were gonna rebut McKernan together, but no one wrote anything or added anything from my literature review about transformation and transfection in cell culture.
Then a month later, this article is sent to me, complete for comments?
I am starting to doubt simply because we don't seem to make progress.
Just you and Nick and Hart seem to make progress and get noticed.
Maybe it's just an illusion, but I pay pretty close attention and the patterns are pretty stark.
I've tagged you all hundreds of times over the years.
And all you have mentioned my work a couple of times, even though you can't point, you cannot point to another biologist who's explained it as I have, because, except for a guy by the name of Duncan, who we all know is a very smart guy, but still stuck in the sequence and in data.
And so while it seemed to be the only one carrying these ideas consistently in and out of Panda for years now, Hart never even worked with me when I was asking for them from PhD for farts sake.
You all seem to be so keen to promote anyone and everyone else.
If you say almost no one says it right, why not promote the one guy you know who has been saying it consistently and might have the biological chops to argue it?
Our kids need more humility and honesty than they are getting.
That's what I sent to them way before I did this stream today and way before I did the stream yesterday.
So it's not a surprise how I feel expressing it publicly maybe is a surprise to them that I would do that.
But I think it's very important for everyone to understand how consistent I have been behind the scenes on Twitter.
and in front and on my stream, I am extremely consistent, extremely honest to the point where I will reveal your DMs if I think that it will get my children closer to freedom.
And now I'm gonna explain it very simply for Jonathan and Martin Neal and Jonathan Engler and Claire Craig and Nick Hudson and anybody else.
A conflated background signal is a signal that doesn't need to be characterized.
It doesn't need to have meaning.
It doesn't need to have any understood patterns.
If all of the eukaryotic and prokaryotic life forms potentially are releasing RNA and DNA all the time, and dead things are releasing DNA and RNA all the time, then there is an incredibly loud background of molecular signals that could be, with cleverness, distorted as spread.
and since we had so many emergency use authorized products around the world.
that were never verified and are all gone now, and we had nothing, no measurements from any of these diagnostics before the pandemic, the best and most parsimonious explanation is that a preexisting background that we don't need to define with a coronavirus here or a coronavirus there or a clone here or a clone, no, a previously existing background could be distorted as a
as a spreading background signal.
Now here's where all that work and all that reading you seem to have missed my main point that I've been making for three years now about the no virus people.
The no virus idea is too easy because it makes you have to accept that all previous
biological observations are false, that they were all mistaken, that they all were liars.
And that's not possible.
What we need is an explanation that encompasses the limited observations that we have made and can count on and describes them in a way or in the context of a model that makes more sense from the stuff that we don't understand and the observations that don't jive with the basic virology model of infection.
That's why the no virus position was so dangerous.
And that's why I put them up there separately, because I think some of them, I don't know which ones, but some of them were very instrumental in making sure that that little trap was a trap and not an exit.
And it could have been an exit.
Because I believe now that a background signal could be distorted as spread and could be distorted as a need to vaccinate, could be distorted as the proof of existence of viruses of all different kinds.
And they could be lying about all of that stuff, but then that doesn't mean that there's nothing there.
We've got to be more sophisticated than that.
And it's more sophisticated than what you just wrote as a review because your review just accepted everything that virology has said and ignored the one main message of infectious clones and called them non-infectious clones.
The whole point is virology people call them infectious clones.
Why?
Because they are the substitute for what they claim is in mother nature.
They claim that there are mixed tapes in mother nature.
But they can only get one song at a time, because when they do these PCR reactions, they only get some of the genes.
And so they have to sequence a lot of times before they can assemble a whole tape.
And when they assemble a whole tape, it doesn't even really last long anyway.
Every time they do it, it just kind of peters out.
And if it makes copies in a cell culture, they are dying.
And so we always got to go back to their nature.
And then we always got to go back to this copy of the stuff that we find in nature that we make.
We find little fragments in nature.
We make a copy of them that we call a mixtape or a infectious clone.
And then we make a CD of that.
And when we make a CD of that, that means we can make lots of copies of that mixtape.
We can send it to all of our friends and we don't lose the fidelity of the signal.
And then they are able to work with a mixtape too.
Now if that analogy throws you off because you're too young or because you don't know what a mixtape is, then let me just say that you can't copy a cassette tape like that over and over and over again with a dual cassette tape and then copy the copy and then copy the copy and then copy the copy because eventually you'll just have hiss and very little music.
Because you can't make high fidelity copies of a cassette tape, but you can make very high fidelity copies of a CD.
And I'm using this analogy for all the people in the cheap seats, because RNA cannot be copied as easily as DNA, and certainly not with the fidelity that DNA can be copied.
And by fidelity, I mean when your copy is as good as the original.
When you make copies of RNA, it is a mutation factory, it is a mutation-generating process, and it is an error-generating process, and it is a fragment-generating process.
And they've known that for 30 or 40 years now.
Whenever they've tried to study these RNA signals in the wild, they inevitably get fragmented RNA translation.
And so the only way that they are able to study it is if they make a DNA copy.
Because if they put these viruses in cell culture, just like the no-virus people point out, they can't really culture anything.
But what they can do is take that sequence that they find in the wild and they can make a synthetic DNA copy of it.
And that synthetic DNA can be equivalent to that CD in the analogy on the previous slide.
And more importantly, that DNA, depending on how big of a DNA construct you wanna make, you might make five different little circular DNA molecules that can all be assembled into one big circle at the end.
And you might use a bacterial culture to make copies of all those circles of DNA, because they like to copy circular DNA, plasmid DNA.
You can lice those bacteria, and in the end, you would have an absolute crap ton, excuse my language, of the original DNA that you started with, where here you'd have essentially a few molecules.
And then after using a very standard procedure of recombinant DNA manufacture in bacteria, you would have as much DNA of that sequence as you wanted.
You want a few milligrams?
No problem.
You want a couple grams?
It's possible.
You want to upscale it to a kilogram?
Also possible.
And I'm not exaggerating.
It's become cheaper and cheaper over the last 20 years to do exactly that.
And now if you take this DNA and you apply it to a cell culture, the cell culture will react.
And what it does is that it translates the DNA into RNA and it also makes proteins and it also spits a bunch of it out and makes more copies of that stuff and puts it into the supernatant.
And if you take that supernatant and look for the DNA, you'll find it.
If you take that supernatant and look for proteins, you'll find it.
And you'll also, if you put it on another cell culture, that cell culture will often react in a very similar way, producing those proteins and copying some of that DNA or RNA that you put on it.
That's transfection and transformation.
And so synthetic DNA, when put on a cell culture or put in an animal, will get you cell culture to react, cell culture to copy, or your animal to produce an immune response.
And so what they've done in virology after they've used recombinant DNA technology, and maybe or maybe not the combination of like either a commercial polymerase or just cell culture or electroporation like Robert Malone is so good at, they use the DNA or the RNA derived from it to create what virology,
Here comes Martin and Jonathan, this is just for you, to create what virology calls infectious clones in animals and in cell culture and in things that they send around the world.
And you can make a lot of this DNA, so you can make a little RNA infectious clones, or you can make a lot of infectious clones.
But the trick is the volume.
the amount, the quantity and purity, which you seem to have completely omitted from all that work and all that reading.
You didn't see the one biological truth that I've been trying to teach for the last two years.
And I've drilled it into you and I drilled it into Kevin McKernan and I've drilled it into John Bowden.
I've drilled it into everybody that has allowed me to so much so that it kept Jessica Rose up at night the day after, uh,
St.
Patrick's Day, 2023, because I told her this exact story.
The only way to make a large quantity of RNA or DNA that represents an RNA virus is to make synthetic copies of it, which virology calls infectious clones, but you can be more sophisticated and just call it synthetic DNA and RNA in quantity.
And now you understand, it's not about whether it spreads or not, or whether it expresses proteins or not, or whether people get sick or not.
It's about extremely high fidelity PCR reactions that you know will work.
It is about extremely high fidelity sequencing reactions that you know will work.
Because those are the signals that we've pointed to and called it a pandemic, nothing else.
We're not pointing at anything else other than molecular signals.
If you wanna call a PCR test for a spike protein a positive, then you can use this technique to make spike protein DNA, spike protein RNA, or spike protein.
And then you can develop a test that will test for spike protein DNA, spike protein RNA, or spike protein, and you can call it spread.
And you don't have to argue about viruses, you don't have to argue about anything other than that they have all the means
all the methodology, it's become cheaper over the last 20 years to do this at an exponential rate, and then you need a coordinated chorus of liars that agrees never to understand this, to try really hard to understand it, and then to write something as absolutely absurd as what they wrote right here.
And you're honestly, if you're gonna give them the benefit of the doubt, you're going to say that despite having conversations with me in private, seeing me present multiple times at Panda and having hours and hours of me repeating this over the last two years, that this is as close as they got, this is as close as they got to being able to explain this.
And it's very hard for me not to come to the conclusion that they're lying.
Because a conflated background signal is not hard to understand.
It's not complicated.
And you don't have to believe in all the basic virology principles in order to understand that.
You can simply explain that this whole thing that I've been talking about here could be the worst case scenario they want everybody to believe in.
And they can say, well, but it's not gain of function, it's claim of function.
And they're not really challenging this because if you don't believe Jonathan and Martin are right, then you believe gain of function is real.
I'm gonna try and be really clear now so that Jonathan and Neil and no one, Martin Neil and Jonathan Engler and nobody else is confused about what I'm trying to say.
They are willing to murder people to keep transformation and transfection of the population moving forward toward common acceptance as a proven methodology on their way to population-wide medical and economic data collection prison system.
Just like Michael Yeadon has been warning us about, it is
for sure that they can find DNA and RNA signals in bat caves.
It is for sure that if they put those DNA and RNA signals into these little dishes that they move from dish to dish and they can detect them in the last dish and they can detect them in the first dish.
And so the one in the last dish is probably more scary than the one in the first dish.
And they can do the same thing with ferrets, they can put a sequence into one and then it'll pass into other ones and they can follow it around and claim that something's happening.
But almost all, almost all of these experiments are based on the production of an unnaturally pure
and an unnaturally large quantity of a highly homogenous DNA or RNA sample that never exists in bat caves, never exists in serial passage, and never exists in the animals that they make sick.
because the moment that they put these pure molecules in these systems, they become the shattered and broken signal that we've been studying for 40 years.
Are you starting to understand what I'm trying to say here, gentlemen?
Because it's not as complicated as you made it out to be in that ridiculous essay that I was very clear a week ago, I think was worth writing because finally you're where I was in 2020.
Now try and catch up.
Because these people are going on.
These people are pushing that narrative forward and that silly review didn't do jack shit to challenge them.
I'm trying to challenge this because they're hiding something.
And one of the biggest things they're hiding is this fellow right there.
Ladies and gentlemen, intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
Transfection in healthy humans was always criminally negligent and RNA cannot pandemic.
You can say it a different way.
Weaponized piles of money have murdered people and gotten people to argue and agree about it being a lab leak.
The old vaccine schedule is injuring and killing thousands of people every year, most likely, and that's why these people won't touch it with a 10-foot pole.
And we don't need to fear wild RNA molecules.
It's too simple a way to say it.
Our kids can understand that, so we better shut Jay up.
Ladies and gentlemen, again, please stop transfections in humans, because they are trying to eliminate the control group by any means necessary.
And if you liked what you saw, this is GigaOM Biological, a high-resistance, low-noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
You can share stream.gigaom.bio.
You can support me at gigaombio.com, gigaombiological.com.
And you can share, share, share would be the best thing to do.
Ladies and gentlemen, these are the people that support the stream along with the people that subscribe to my sub stack There's some very special people on this list including Greg and Steven and a few others that are just
I don't know what to say, but you guys are really the bomb.
And don't forget, I'm going to be in South Dakota.
And that means that I'm going to be off tomorrow, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday, and maybe even Monday.
I might bring a computer with me, but I might not.
And so I might only be able to stream from like an iPad or something.
And in that case, I don't know if I will.
So you might have to hold your breath until Tuesday.
Um, and if that's the case, I'll keep in touch on, on, on, on soapbox and whatever.
Uh, wish me luck.
Um, and if you're not there in person, be there in spirit.
Um, we'd really appreciate it because I'll feel you.
I'll definitely feel you.
I mean, I feel you now, so I'll feel you then.
Thanks.
And I'll see you soon.