You're welcome.
you
vaccine, if you think about it.
You know, if we're defining vaccine really liberally, and these COVID vaccines are vaccines, the flu vaccine is vaccine, okay.
But actually, they're kind of cheating when they're calling these things vaccines.
And, you know, anything with really rapidly fading efficacy, such that you need shots within a year, you know, Canada's saying nine months, is as actually J.J.
Cooey's insistence, and I think he's right, on calling them transfections rather than vaccines.
Yeah.
In retrospect, iMovie is so weak.
I mean, it's so, oh man.
Man, I also had spiked tires on 365 days every year.
So like, I don't wipe out even on oil with those suckers.
Paint, none of that stuff bothered me because I had spiked tires.
Like I'm not the pig deck, as they say in Norwegian.
I wasn't fooling around.
I wiped out a couple of times and broke my wrist once.
And after that, I never took them off my bike again, even in the summer.
Post that link at the soapbox, too.
I'll see if I can check it out.
Yikes.
Whatever.
Another viral disease in horses.
I'm sure that Robert Malone will rescue us from this one, too.
At least he'll ride in and let us know why his horses are immune.
Mm.
Yeah.
He's scheduled for 60 minutes next.
He's going on French, British, Italian, Japanese television.
People everywhere are starting to listen to him.
It's embarrassing.
Welcome to the show, ladies and gentlemen.
Welcome to the Hamster Wheel.
We are still there, of course, still unable to shed social media entirely, and so our consciousness is still largely occupied by the illusions that they have cast on us, the enchantments that they have cast over the last five years.
And so we are still fighting those illusions that were planted in our children's minds and our own minds by these elaborate computer animations and these charlatans which have agreed to lie to us, to bamboozle us.
And the way that they bamboozle us is very complicated.
because they each have different pieces of the puzzle and those pieces fit intricately together so that as you assemble them, no matter which pieces you put together, they all assemble into the same story, the same mystery has been solved.
And what's at the end of that is a biological mythology that can enslave our grandchildren.
If you want to get out, you need to understand why intramuscular injection of any combination of substances with the intent of augmenting the immune system is dumb.
You need to understand why transfection in healthy humans was always criminally negligent.
And you need to understand why RNA cannot pandemic, and that's because viruses aren't pattern integrities.
There was no mystery virus which caused excess deaths.
These excess deaths were expected and in fact a large inconvenience for the most of Western world and so they needed a long list of ways that they could disguise the murder and lies because there would never be any epidemiological evidence of spread.
And so that's why we don't have lawyers usefully fighting these legislative traps that we're in that allow these people to think that they have blanket immunity to do whatever they want and to roll out whatever they want.
Because again, this is all part of the same illusion that's hiding these murder and lies, these expected deaths that have been misconstrued as a novel virus.
And it's in order to prevent us
essentially prevent us what was from already happening before the pandemic where people were starting to realize that the vaccine schedule might be a little bit goofy.
They were starting to realize that transfection was never really going to go anywhere and there was no way that we were going to be able to get
that we were going to be able to get anybody to accept it as a medical thing because it was never going to pass what even the FDA would consider a safety test.
And so they also really needed to conceal the fact that RNA can't do this.
um and so the only way to this this is why it was so convenient for all of these these people to be retiring and getting old and and and becoming frail and being unhealthy that's why it has been okay for the last 20 years in america in particular not anywhere else in particular around the world but particularly in america
for the food industry to go absolutely south and for the medical industry to absolutely become a profit-oriented machine.
Because there was this gigantic problem with prosperity and it needed to be stopped.
And so for the last 30 years they have been reducing the family size in America and encouraging us
to believe in ghosts.
Ghosts that are based on biology about RNA that just cannot be true.
And I was a victim of this illusion as well because I had been taught by people who had been taught by people who had learned biology 101 based on genes.
Biology 101 based on genes is the trap
Um, and Mendel is part of that illusion.
Um, and this totalitarianism they want to trap us in really, really requires at its foundation, this, this mythology about how genes and their determinism in, in our destiny, um, as a species, but also as individuals, um, ultimately governs who we are.
Uh, and that's terrifying because we're, they're very close to closing the trap right now.
They're very close to getting a lot of young people to believe this.
And I think that there can be no doubt that social media is a weaponized governance mechanism that requires the active participation of highly trained acolytes that keep us busy on the internet and make sure that useful ideas and useful patriots
do not assemble, but that faux groups assemble.
false groups of people assembled to save us and these weaponized piles of money have almost unlimited resources especially if we acquiesce to social media use to convince us about what to argue and with whom to argue they have almost unlimited access to our attention and they have unlimited resources therefore participating in an argument with them is almost
impossible not for it to result in us accepting the premise of the narrative.
That's what happened on Twitter in 2020 and 2021, like it or not.
We are governed by a theater that spans from mainstream media to all social media platforms, includes all sides of their mythologies.
And I've really come to see Twitter or X as central to this illusion, at least in their game.
I don't think they managed to pull off what they wanted to pull off yet, but I do think that in their designed script, X was gonna be censorship, but truth, and censorship, but the truth was there, and then Elon was supposed to come and buy it, and then the people that were telling the quote-unquote truth
before he bought it would be promoted.
And so this was a multi-step game.
Like The Sting, if you've never seen that movie, these people have been performing a narrative.
And I, as an academic biologist, was very vulnerable to their narrative because they spent a lot of time on me.
They sent a lot of different people to talk to me, to join with me on Twitter groups,
calling me on the phone, putting me in signal chats, and it's all because I had a kind of a legitimate background in biology, a long track record of trying to get tenure, and that's in fact where Gigaohm Biological derives its name.
And so there was a problem when I was speaking up.
And I think that the best thing, the reason why I played that cartoon or that intro in the beginning with JC on a bike is for you to see how absolutely vulnerable and naive I was at that point.
I was riding on my bicycle.
Sorry, I'm just going to pop in here on the bottom.
I was riding on my bicycle and editing movies at night, trying to impress the faculty with what I thought would be like something that no other faculty member had, a YouTube channel and a useful one and an interesting one and one that contributed to, could contribute to the courses that he was teaching.
And so I was just getting started.
And so that was me doing my best to like brown nose basically to try and stand out amongst a crowd of people who all wanted that kind of attention.
And so in retrospect, when I look back on it and I see that trailer or I see some of those videos, I can really see who I was and I can see what my mindset was and I could see how positive I was that that was what I was supposed to be doing.
and that everything was on the right track.
I mean, I'd just gotten all this free equipment from a company in Germany that I had bought from for years and made friends with a lot of the guys there.
And so I was sitting on a room full of stuff that nobody at the University of Pittsburgh could have ever gotten by themselves by sending a couple emails.
But I got a pretty amazing company in Germany to send me their state-of-the-art
Because I said, hey, I need some help.
I'm trying to get tenure.
I'm barely hanging on here.
I'm doing everything I can.
Hey, check out my YouTube channel.
And by the way, I could really use another rig here and I don't have one.
And he sent stuff.
And so at the beginning of the pandemic, I was sitting in a position where I was
You know, like that guy on, you saw the, sure, everybody saw it, the guy in the sailboat who's told everybody on the news that he was just, you know, this is all he's got, all of his stuff is in this boat, so he's not evacuating, he's just gonna wait out the storm.
I mean, I was all in.
I had dragged my family around the world, I had raised my kids in, we had kids in Norway and then in the Netherlands, and then we dragged them all the way to Pittsburgh because we were all in on my career.
We could have stayed in the Netherlands and I could have got some other job, probably at a teaching, at a English speaking high school or something like that.
I could have easily tried to stay in the Netherlands if that was the number one priority.
But when you look back on it, our number one priority as a family was to move back to the Netherlands and do my job.
And when my job in the Netherlands didn't work out, we bailed on the Netherlands in a month in my mind.
I don't think my wife has ever bailed on the Netherlands and her family's beautiful and huge and happy.
But when I look back and I see that video, I'm not proud of it.
I cringe and I recall a very, very difficult time for my family.
because we were living on a shoestring budget, renting our house in a city that we didn't really know why we came to, but it was okay and it was nice.
And then Trump got elected within months and the whole place lost their mind.
And then they were burning cities down.
It was nuts.
And as I told Mark yesterday in the chat, we had some didn't even understand how somebody's parents died in the first six days we were here.
And in fact, you will recall there was also, you can look it up in the Pittsburgh, but the same year that we were here, there was also a guy in the end of our street.
in that part of Pittsburgh that had a whole house full of guns and got them emptied and they had like they had like army vehicles coming down there to to because it was a standoff they had some kind of robot and stuff that was also on the news in the first year that I was back in in America so we we really had a crazy year that
We all just, my whole family went through because I was going to be a tenured academic biologist or we were going to crash.
And this pandemic thing could have ruined my life.
It really
if it wasn't for my wife believing in me and trusting in me and never doubting me for a second, this could have destroyed our family in a heartbeat, all the things that we went through.
It destroyed the relationship I have with my brother up until now.
That's why it's called Silent Rob.
Originally, it was a hat tip for the fact that he helped me out with a
with uh extra money when we were moving to my trying to put a security deposit down on our house but like now it's silent rob because he doesn't talk to me anymore
And so my life is not great.
I'm not having a good time here.
But what I do know is that my experience getting here has put me in a unique position to kind of have a good idea of how bad it is and how many of these people are likely not working with us.
Because I was part of what needed to be controlled.
And I didn't know it at the time.
I only maybe know it now, but the farther we get back in this storyline, the easier it is for me to see how manipulated I was.
And so I'm going to look at a video that's actually stored here in the Batcave.
And I'm also going to look at a video that's stored at GigaOMBiological.com in the archive list, which is also on Vimeo.
And the reason why I'm going to do that is because I think it's time that we really, you know,
I've gotta, I gotta fix this.
I gotta open this wound or I gotta heal this wound or whatever the wound is.
I don't know what the right word is.
I gotta peel the band-aid off.
I gotta, there's definitely going to be something in this video that's gonna be painful for me to see.
There's definitely going to be something in this video that's painful for me to see.
Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the show.
This is GigaOM Biological, a high resistance, low noise information brief brought to you by a biologist.
I'm coming to you live from my garage in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Yes, it is October.
2024 and I am shocked.
I have to be very honest with you that we're still here But I am also very happy here to be here with you and have the kind of optimism that I have because The doors haven't closed yet.
I don't have a chip in my hand yet My kids aren't chipped yet The internet is still on and I
You know, it's not snowing outside, so I don't know.
I have limited things to complain about and I don't want to complain.
Just making sure everybody hears it, right?
This is who I am.
I'm a guy who was on the internet, and particularly I was on Twitter in the beginning in a group called Drastic, thinking that I was fighting against the Empire.
And what I did was I kind of met all these people in blue as I was fighting the Empire, and I thought that they were helping me, or more importantly, I thought I was joining their team and helping them.
And in reality, these people were a part of these people's same, it's the same illusion.
Whether you fight on the Rebel Alliance team or whether you fight or you believe in the Empire's okay, you are sitting in this chair and playing a Star Wars game.
You're not really escaping.
And that was a trick that I didn't understand.
And it wasn't until I started talking about this stuff in 2021 that the heat really got turned up on me.
And actually, when I was talking about population pyramids was when I started to meet people like Kevin McKernan.
So, weaponized piles of money have known for a long time already that there was going to be an increase in all-cause mortality to be expected by the large families after World War II.
And a lot of these countries would have been potentially budgetarily vulnerable
to a bit of a problem here.
And so I think that that's that easily and most parsimoniously explains why countries as diverse as China and the UK and the Netherlands and France and America would all more or less cooperate in lockstep.
in order to orchestrate a theater that would take advantage of this known increase in all-cause mortality, never let a good opportunity go to waste.
And if this is a biological phenomenon that can't be avoided, then what better thing to use it for than to convince you that they saved you from something.
And so that's what they did.
They took advantage of this opportunity to stage the plandemic.
And so how they did it, of course, is they used this whole list of potential ways to murder people.
They didn't use all the list.
Holy cow, it should be like, it should sound like this then if I'm gonna be so big and small.
The list that they use is varied and different across countries, depending on what protocols were previously in place.
For example, in the UK, where they were already more or less euthanizing people before the pandemic,
They had a whole series of protocols that were more or less acceptable even to the people that were working there Whereas in America it required a little more subterfuge and a few key doctors being visible by a lot of people so that an illusion of consensus about falling oxygen levels and an illusion of consensus about the relevance of using you know, if you got nothing else you could give them pure oxygen and
And the purposeful ignorance of the ideas that were already around for a couple decades that pure oxygen isn't really that good for you, especially dry, cold, pure oxygen, which is often what is coming out of these full mouth masks that are hooked directly to a tank where Kyle Seidel would often put it up to 60 liters a minute to try and drive these people's pulse ox back to 99.99% where it should be.
And so yeah, you know, they've also in America, we've had this wonderful additional source of all cause mortality, the opioid crisis, and all of these people have been very, very
united in their inability to figure this in and subtract it from the total number of deaths, which if you think about it, would be just another way to argue that they screwed up a response.
It could be just another way to argue that the response was exaggerated.
It could be just another way to expose Tony Fauci and the bad, oh, wait.
So you see how it works.
Once you see that all the cards aren't played, once you see that these people have been holding trump cards for a long time, like the fact that you can't be a guy with 20 years of experience in pharmaceutical manufacturing and not know that the pharmaceutical companies in order to make biologics are making, you know, grams of DNA and grams of RNA already.
You can't not know that.
That's how all biologics are made.
And so it's strange, right, that everybody who's been in this space now for five years still hasn't gotten to the point where they can say that.
It's not like they had to make a bunch of new stuff or they actually could cut a bunch of steps off of what they were already doing.
They try to make you think that they had to make all these new manufacturing facilities, they had to build all these new vats.
Come on.
They got you on that one.
Any company that could make biologics like antibodies or anything protein-derived, it was inevitably starting with a synthetic DNA construct, which is also the starting point, lo and behold, for virology most of the time, especially the really good papers.
And so in 2020, they needed to have clever people or maybe not so clever people get seated, maybe egoistic people get seated with little bits of the narrative that in any mismatch assembly would lead that naive person to think that, wow, I'm putting pieces of this puzzle together and starting to understand how
how malevolent this web really is.
And the inevitable conclusion here is that they're covering something up and the mystery is solved when you think it's a lab leak.
And this was all cleverly designed by the people who wanted transfection to be accepted as a medicine, accepted as a countermeasure, accepted as a general methodology that in general worked.
And even if it's got a little DNA in it, that won't hurt old people anyway, according to Buckhalter.
And really what they were doing was seeding a mythology about a novel virus that would overlap with and be easily misconstrued with the known and expected and hypothesized outcomes that would be big signals in a big population that were being transfected to new proteins.
And tying any of these effects to the spike protein in general, of course, protects transfection as a methodology in general, and puts all of the blame on that special protein.
And so this combination of ideas automatically pigeonholes anybody who's trying to figure this out into putting the round peg in the round hole or the square peg in the square hole and thinking that you solved the puzzle.
But you really haven't because what you've done is accepted their narrative that somehow or another, despite the flaws or the rush or the mistakes or the contamination, this idea is so sound because it goes back 20 or 30 years to the Human Genome Project when all this genius came into fruition and became industrial.
And so all parties have accepted this worst case scenario, which is endemicity, this idea that a virus can go from a mud puddle all the way to covering most of the lungs in the known, you know, human space and environment, and even the lungs of
white-tailed deer in North America and a few other, I guess.
And so this concept is very clever, because if you don't have any data from before 2020, when the novel virus supposedly emerged, the novel RNA signal appears.
then you can't differentiate that from a background RNA signal that may have been present before you started testing.
And in fact, that's almost guaranteed what this is if there is a real bona fide signal, bona fide signal in the background.
then it would be a signal that was already there and that they already took the time to characterize so that they could slowly roll out a series of PCR tests that would be accurate but not accurate or whatever.
I mean, you can imagine all kinds of ways that they could orchestrate that.
One way that would accept some tenements of there being some signal in the background that could be misconstrued or called a coronavirus or a
a lipid particle with RNA in it is that they are everywhere and that they characterized them under the guise of metabiotes sampling all this stuff.
And after they characterized it and put it into the coolest, you know, genealogical phenotypical tree, then they took that sequence and said that that's what they were getting when they were sequencing at DITRA.
And then at some moment when Ditra decided, okay, we'll just let it go and let everybody else sequence the stuff, they had already seeded a phylogenetic tree that was kind of presupposed the background that they knew was already there.
And now it looks like this amazing biological event that really validates this new technology of high throughput sequencing and really validates the
the whole field of virology all in one go.
So we get transfection, we get virology, we get gain of function virology, we get high throughput sequencing, we get all these technologies just get accepted in one giant
one giant enchantment and all it requires is us to acquiesce to the the medium of enchantment which would be social media and especially x so anybody that was on twitter was absolutely and positively fooled and i i am convinced that that is one of the reasons why i was so fooled
because Twitter became my primary window to the people that were, and my primary means of communicating with them.
And because I believed that this was a spontaneous activity that was happening despite what all the world governments would have wanted to happen, I really thought I was in the mystery machine solving this puzzle.
And it took me a really long time to get there.
And when I got there is when all these people went bananas for three years.
And so here we are now with COVID shots are bad.
Nobody talking about the extensive revealing study that happens and released in Scotland again, now in 2024, a new update of it again.
And nobody's talking about that.
Nobody's talking about the murder in 2020.
And if we were talking about the murder in 2020, it would be completely different, but all of these people won't do it because they also then would have to explain what the hell they were doing in 2020 and before.
Here's just the example from Scotland where you can see midazolam used in 2020.
That's clearly murder.
And then that could be misconstrued as a, right?
If you are in 2020, like right here, then you don't know when this is gonna end.
This just looks like, holy balls.
And this is exactly in line with what happened in New York.
Holy cow, we are in trouble.
And then we locked down, so it went away, right?
Oh, it came back.
Oh no, it went away again, it came back.
And so that's why they won't discuss how this background signal could work, and I'm talking about the background signal of RNA, and I'm also talking about the background signal of more people gonna die for the next 10 years, and then go away, or they will go back down, or it will collapse even.
And they won't have saved us from disease.
It will be that this large population of people that's all around the same decade of age, because they were all born into families after World War II and are now aging out, that bump in our population is going to go away.
And then we will be left with a lot fewer people.
And they knew this.
And so they used murder to accelerate that in a few places.
And then they had social media people talking about what going on in America and how the lockdown saved people in Australia and New Zealand.
And that's why you need anonymous accounts on American social media from Australia telling you and saving you from things.
that won't question Robert Malone or Pierre Kory or Peter McCullough or any of these people that needed to travel down to Australia to make sure that in person somebody could tell you how bad it was in America.
Pierre Kory's been all over the world telling people how bad it was in America and he started in the US Senate and then has been on world tours with Robert Malone ever since.
And there's no reason for one guy to be doing that unless they need one guy to do it to stick to the right story.
Or two guys, or five guys, or anybody that they can recruit that's got their head so stuck in their navel they don't understand how they're being used.
And so they don't teach you how PCR can be very accurate on an academic bench, but not for a
a diagnostic and it's elaborate lies.
And it started all the way back in 2020.
They don't define the countermeasures as transformations and transfections, and they never did.
They list and define the many ways that even in its purest form, it wouldn't have worked.
No, they don't.
And it was never going to be in its purest form.
And they won't talk about infectious clones.
And most importantly, Kevin McKernan won't talk about infectious clones.
He says that this whole idea of it just being transformation and transfection and cell culture being misconstrued as virology as chemtrail retarded.
And so I guess he thinks also saying that RNA cannot pandemic is just very easy to dismiss as chemtrail retarded, even though these things are all obvious truths and so I think we can expose this guy just by watching a few videos.
That's the reason why.
Steve Kirsch made an own goal with his, you know, there may be a time when we have safe vaccines.
That's always been the position that these people were going to play.
That's why Steve Kirsch is like one of the largest lifetime donors to the DNC.
That's why Robert Malone was actually a Democrat his whole life, and you can find evidence for it online.
That's why Transfection and Transformation was on Robert Malone's resume in 2017.
And that's why we have Elon Musk being said by Tucker Carlson to have
saved free speech, which is just absolutely absurd.
This is a military operation to get you to accept and use a military program as a substitute for free speech while you're actually giving away a great deal of how you think and a great deal of what you pay attention to and reveal what you want to pay attention to, to the people who care.
And so this guy gets on, not a week ago even, and says that polio was bad and smallpox was bad and without those vaccines, we'd still have smallpox and polio, almost as if he thinks the kids are still getting a smallpox vaccine.
And he, like Kevin McKernan, all the way back in 2020, says that regulation is killing America.
So this guy who has a military technology company for tunneling, rockets, satellite, internet,
and RNA and electric cars.
This guy is claiming that number one, he is so good at business that he can do all of those things.
And that he has so many ideas that he can assemble people that can make those things.
And so he makes Steve Jobs, who just made the iPhone, look like kind of a chump, right?
Because Steve Jobs should have also had
tunneling company and a rocket company and a and space company and electric car company and Self-driving company.
He should have had all those things too.
If he was a really really cool guy.
I mean, what is Jeff Bezos?
He's just got a rocket I mean, he doesn't have a rocket company that gets contracts and puts satellites up in the air for his other company.
That's making Come on guys We've got to wake up
We gotta get out of this, we gotta snap out of it.
And we need to snap out of it now.
And coming to you as humbly as I possibly can, being the guy who was trapped on X from 2020, because I was, I needed to be trapped.
They sought me out.
Like they sought me out and trapped me on purpose.
And several of these people worked together several different times from the Brett Weinstein signal chat to the Steve Kerr steering committee.
I have seen how they do it.
This is always how they do it.
And if you are making any progress on these social media platforms, they are actively doing it to you, I assure you.
And you need to, in retrospect, and internally investigate who you're following and what you're listening to to understand how it is they do it.
If you're just watching podcasts and enjoying them, then you're already 12 meters under in the pool.
But if you're treading water at the surface, what you're doing is arguing with these people, and you still think that some of these people here are okay, and they're not.
Wittingly or unwittingly, they are gone.
They are already part of the machine and their livelihood and everything depends on it, just like mine did.
And had I shut my mouth and kept working, maybe, maybe not, but I would have had a better chance of staying in the system had I not opened my mouth.
But when I opened my mouth, I invoked this machine.
I became the focus of these people.
And it started with Kevin McCairn and Paul Cottrell, who later became related to George Webb to me, but I didn't know that because George Webb had already blocked me on X from the beginning of the pandemic.
I was already blocked by him.
And so you can see how the whole thing works.
It becomes immediately apparent in retrospect if you look back and see it.
It's just one continuous game.
Because at some point three years later, Kevin McCairn and Kevin McKernan are actually promoted on the same LifeSite News article where they're both like speaking to some health group in Australia.
And so these people have been performing and coordinating a confusion narrative online designed to get you to think that you're solving a mystery and giving you different pieces of the puzzle, but never all of them, in order to keep all of us solving the mystery on our own in our head and keep us in the chair.
And the more you engage, the more likely it is that they're going to get you.
And so I think it's time to dare to look again.
And that's what I want to do here.
So I'm going to see how this works.
Let's see here.
Yes.
So if you go to GigaOMBiological.com slash archive, and you scroll down, and if your screen is like mine over here, and it's too tiny, then it'll be in more and you go into archive there, that's where this is.
And if you scroll down here, you can find the two videos where I talk about Kevin McKernan.
So this is where he comes on my podcast here.
So I think it's important to watch this video again, so you can see how
impressed I was with his resume and and remember at this time I'm just a neuroscientist trying to figure out it's December it's 1010 what is it let me see the Vimeo it is move head
It is 12, 12, 21.
Okay.
So that's when the real, the real interview took place.
And I'm still in my old house, the one that we lost, um, that we really wanted to keep in the woods.
Um, and so, uh, I apologize for, you're going to see my bedroom for a second there, but it's not my bedroom now.
Uh, and I think it's important to listen to this because, um,
This is the same month, okay?
This is 12-12.
And now on my website, stream.gigaohm.bio, there's a channel called The Bat Cave.
And in that channel, The Bat Cave, you can find a lot of difference.
So let me go to home.
And then if you go to home, you go down here to Bat Cave.
That's this one here.
See that?
Click.
And then you'll get to this list of videos and you can go down here and you can see the December 30th, 2020 Kevin McKernan.
Even after the vaccine, they want masks and they want social distancing.
And there doesn't seem to be any exit strategy for this.
So now what I want to show you here is that this is in the same month.
Kevin McKernan is on this guy's podcast for the third time here.
And just listen to their banter and how happy he is and listen to what they talk about.
the UN and others in third world countries, there's going to be starvation.
I'm Christina Hudson Kohler, an egg processing manager living in Syracuse, New York, and you are listening to the Vance Crowe podcast.
Now remember, Vance Crowe used to work for the World Bank and something else and something else.
And now he started a podcast at the beginning of the pandemic and had Kevin McKernan on in May and in June and now in December.
This is the third time he's been on.
And this is exactly the same month that I interviewed him just two weeks later.
And listen just briefly to what they talk about.
And think about how it is that somebody who claims to be a pot geneticist, who was testing pot for COVID at the beginning of the pandemic because he was afraid it might get in the supply chain, knows so much about so many things in February of, this is December of 2020.
So think about this, December of 2020, when does he come on my program?
A year later.
A year later, okay, so a year later he's working on me.
This is a year before, and look at his banter, look at what he's talking about, look at what he says, look at how comfortable he is with this dude.
Welcome back to the podcast.
I'm glad you're here today.
I'm interviewing a past guest, Kevin McKernan.
Kevin is a scientist that once was working at MIT on the human genome project.
He has then separated, started his own company, built them up, and he is an expert in the PCR space, which is really an interesting space to be in during coronavirus.
So we have a wild conversation about
the details of those tests, those nasal swabs that people are having shoved up their noses and the rapid test and what does the antigen test mean.
And Kevin is one of those guys that I love staying in contact with.
I watch him on Twitter and I find his perspective to be interesting if only because it's different.
I happen to find Kevin to be intelligent, fair-minded, able to articulate complicated ideas, but even if he wasn't, I really love the fact that I'm able to explore ideas that are not being published in other places, and I think that that is a really important thing.
We're going to get to the interview, but one thing that you should be aware of is if you like conversations like this.
Conversations with people that want to push the envelope, that they believe that their faith is best tested by going out and exploring the world, consider joining the Articulate Ventures Network.
It is a place where we have big conversations about all kinds of complicated ideas and people have various perspectives that are not all in sync.
But I want you to hear how it opens.
Because if you hear how it opens and you hear how happy he is, I want you to see how different it is when he interviews with me a year later.
at network.articulate.ventures.
So I'm gonna head now to the interview with Dr. Kevin McKernan.
Kevin McKernan, welcome back to the pod.
Thank you.
Yes, it's been too long.
Miss Chandy about this stuff.
What's my world has changed.
So for anybody that is new to the podcast, Kevin McKernan was one of the very first guests I had on that was willing to take a contrary position to the national narrative about what was going on with coronavirus.
And I don't mean it contrary as in like it wasn't there.
It was let's think about the measures that we're taking.
Let's lay out some lines.
Let's talk about data.
And man, you are the guy that I turn to when I say it's really easy to me to know what the national narrative is.
But how do I know what other people are thinking?
Because it's often pushed out of the world.
So what do you think?
What is the status of coronavirus right now at the end of December of 2020?
OK, well, my sense of it is it would be much better if they didn't make a lot of these generic outpatient treatments illegal in our country.
So for those who aren't familiar with ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine, which we probably spoke about many months ago, those have proven to work really well in India.
And now we have doctors down at the Department of Homeland Security pounding the fist on the table to open them up for US use.
And I think that just happened.
Ironically, like the week they made the vaccine available, they opened up those two, which is kind of incredible timing.
But yeah, I think in India, they're seeing something like 90 or 80 or 90 deaths per million and maybe 100 deaths per million.
And we're up at like 800 here in the States.
And one of the things they do there is if you get symptoms, they don't tell you to wait around for a couple of weeks before coming to the hospital.
They give you hydroxychloroquine out of the gate.
And I think the ivermectin data looks even better.
So those are really cheap, off-patent drugs that haven't been used quite a bit here.
And so we have a contagion here that's larger than it needs to be.
At the same time, there's a lot of other folks I follow on Twitter that have some really good studies here, or will point you to a lot of good studies that demonstrate the excess deaths are fairly exaggerated here in the news.
We have this obsession of following PCR cases, and PCR cases are really not informative.
I'm
a
It's not reflective of what's actually going on if you dig into the numbers.
The numbers are we have a second wave that's really a ripple.
Although, if you look at the PCR data, it looks as big, if not bigger, than the first wave.
But it's just not pulling through in terms of the IFR.
The IFR, and this continues to go down.
I think John Ioannidis just put some work out demonstrating it approaching the flu now.
which I think is what we spoke about back in March, is that this thing would eventually reach the flu, if not lower, because it'll probably reflect what most other coronaviruses do over time.
You know, your treatments get better and you understand the disease.
Now, it's important to see a couple things here.
Number one, Vance Crowe pushed Twitter.
It was the only, the only
The only social media he mentioned was Twitter.
He didn't say, I'm happy to be on YouTube or thank goodness YouTube doesn't wipe my nothing.
He only said Twitter.
This guy also only said Twitter.
And what I think I see here, and only in retrospect, is it visible?
Because as we get farther and farther down the road, right?
The more that you look back and see that all of these things line up a little too neatly.
All of these stories line up a little too neatly, and all of these people's stories start, like wait, they were all on this.
They were all on the same bullshit.
And it's not because they were all watching the TV.
Kevin McKernan isn't reading the New York Times to get his bits.
Kevin McKernan isn't active in a bunch of DM groups asking people what they think.
And he's not here to ask Vance Crowe what Vance Crowe thinks.
Look at how enthusiastic, look at how certain.
There's no mysteries here.
This guy knows exactly what's going on.
Now, one year later, I should let it go for a little while longer, but one year later, I'm gonna interview with him.
more, you understand who it affects, and you try to protect the vulnerable, and you do a better job at managing the disease, and the numbers improve over time.
So, yeah, I think there's a lot of problems in the PCR side of things, and that's what seems to be driving the panic and the fear.
And a lot of that, I think, is a misunderstanding of what PCR is measuring.
It's really not measuring your
Well, here, let's stop for a second, because one of the biggest differences between when you and I spoke the first time and now is that I didn't know anyone that had coronavirus, but we were watching videos of people laying dead bodies in the street and running away, right?
So now it's been a little bit inverted.
Like, we don't see those types of things now.
We maybe see hospitals.
I don't watch regular news, so I don't really have that much of a chance to see it.
But I do know people that have lost grandparents to coronavirus.
I know people that are in their 50s going to the emergency room and getting put on ventilators.
So like one thing that I hesitate as I'm hearing you describe this stuff is because I'm like, I don't know, man.
Seems like people got pretty sick with this one.
Yeah, I'm not a denier.
It's happening.
Without a doubt, there's a virus spreading around.
But you have to also put it in context to all the other numbers that are going on.
The flu has disappeared.
So this time last year, there's probably some coronavirus floating around that we all called the flu.
So we probably under-called it last year, and we're probably over-calling it this year.
So yeah, those things do happen.
There is a very- So there's no questioning of the narrative here at all?
None.
And a very joyous reunion, a very joyous reiteration of what's going on, a very swift summary with a lot of jovial and upbeat energy.
Not a dim and grim outlook at all about the level of deception or malevolence that must be involved at this stage if it's not that big of a deal, but everybody still thinks it is a big deal.
Something is not congruent here anymore.
You're telling us that the rocket is crashing, but you're not really that panicked.
You're telling us that the parachute is not gonna work, but you're not that panicked.
You're telling us that we don't know where this train is going because they're telling us stories, but you're not that panicked.
So let's just escape out of here and see what the other one holds for us.
And now we're going to go to Vmil here, and I can put that link in the chat if you want.
You can also just find it by, oh no, I can't.
That's the other computer.
You're just going to have to find it on my webpage.
So let's see how this works.
Oh, there we go.
All right.
OK, so my background.
So first of all, don't be disturbed.
But at this time already, at the end of 2021 was when I started to develop whatever that thing was on my vocal cords that exploded on the 23rd.
Sorry, the like Halloween day or whenever we were having the Halloween party here.
In October of last year, some great big bubble exploded in my throat and I coughed up a bunch of blood and then this voice came back.
But I have the bad voice in this video, just beware.
I've been in genomics for about 25 years.
I started at the Whitehead Institute in Cambridge, Mass.
This is with Eric Lander working on the Human Genome Project.
I was the team leader for R&D there.
We built all the robotics that's in that Nature paper for the floor that does all the purification and sequencing for that project.
And around 2000 I spun some of that stuff out.
There was several patents we filed on magnetic bead isolation of viruses and DNA from E. coli and that stuff got spun out to a company called Agincourt.
Agincourt became one of the larger sequencing providers in the country at the time and eventually got
acquired by Beckman Coulter for a lot of the viral purification tools we had.
We were building these RNA and DNA purification kits using these magnetic beads.
And so they needed that and they needed both.
And so he has been working on technology specifically related to viral isolation.
And of course, we know that viral isolation is already very sketchy if you're not acknowledging all the other signals that are likely to be at that same fraction.
can go into that later in our biology 101 in our molecular course but this this is this is nuts and in case you haven't heard I'll just drop it in here because it popped into my head the red pill conference is no longer an in-person event because according to Ed Griffin's post on on the website that I guess there's a
a general worry that there will be unrest after the election.
And so not very many people are interested in traveling.
And so because of extremely low turnout, they've decided to invest all of their resources into the free live stream that they're going to make out of it.
So for better or for worse, the red pill that I was supposed to be one of the headliners at, at the November 17th or 16th in Oklahoma is now going to be a virtual event only.
that onto some of the automation they had.
So they came and acquired the company and spun out one of our R&D projects that was building the solid sequencer at the time.
That got acquired a year later by Applied Biosystems.
They brought that sequencer to market.
I spent about five years there, working on a platform competing with Illumina and then also brewing up other ones.
We ultimately acquired Ion Torrent.
which makes these chips right here.
Another one of those little sequencers that runs on a chip.
And that, I didn't invent any of that.
I was just someone who, we saw the technology and pulled it in, and Jonathan Rothberg's team kind of carried a lot of that weight, but our team at Beverly also.
Now, far be it from me to be paranoid, but I'm analyzing my own show here, like looking through there, looking at the camera.
So it's,
You know, it's already goofy, but remember, I'm not trying to analyze my own show so much as to illustrate how bamboozled I was at the time.
This is still when, um, let me think about this very carefully.
21.
Hmm.
No, I was already done.
I was already on my own here.
So this was right before, actually, if I think about it now in the timeline, it would be in January of 2022.
So just one month later.
when oh wow okay so this video takes place on 12-12-2021 and in January of 2022 is when Charles Rixey came to my house in Pittsburgh actually this house right here spent the night and we did a stream that a couple months later would be the stream that Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
would tell me that Robert Malone sat him down and made him watch and that was the reason why he called me and wanted to hire me as a consultant
And so this is one month before Charles Rixey comes to my house.
This guy wanted to be on my street.
It's just what it is, right?
I don't know what to tell you.
I didn't have any followers then.
I wasn't, I was, I was dying here.
Like,
If it wasn't for Greg at this time, my family would have never even, I mean, it's crazy.
And there were all kinds of different people that were helping me back then.
And I can't thank any of them enough for allowing me to go through that even when I wasn't really there yet, even close to there yet, fully under their control, really.
So now remember what he told Vance Crowe a year before about PCR tests being, you know, kind of not right, but right.
You know, there being multiple variants, there's definitely a virus.
All of these things that he was talking about, this is a year later.
about 100 of us jumped on making that platform sing.
And then after that, I kind of just jumped out to start, we need to do something different.
And I had a non-compete and now the company was LifeTech and it pretty much meant I couldn't work anywhere in the biotech space because they had fingers everywhere.
So I started working in the cannabis space doing sequencing cannabis genomes, trying to get more of these compounds public, if you will.
And what I mean by public is there's a lot of the things that you're seeing in COVID right now have been plaguing that industry for decades.
He actually wasn't in the other room though.
He was sitting right next to me and I had me on the green screen and then I had him on a separate camera so I could make myself smaller.
really a trick.
I had him in the same room next to me.
It looked like that, but it wasn't.
This was really when I had no space at all.
I was pulling this off.
This was really a desk with a curtain behind it.
And then I sat him at a little table next to me against the wall where the ceiling was slanted.
It was pretty funny.
If it looked like he was in a different room, then I did that way better than I thought I did.
Science is funded primarily by government, and it crafts a certain narrative about harms.
And so I was noticing that that plant was severely underappreciated, and we just put its genome public.
And since then, we've been building tool picks and shovels.
We sell snip chips and PCR kits to that industry to help them breed and help them track down viruses and track down different microbes that may affect the yield of the plant.
That's my background.
I did do a little bit of clinical sequencing as well for five years.
So I know some of the CLIA rules and regulations.
I wonder what clinical sequencing he did.
It's probably cancer.
I'm just guessing because his dad died of cancer and his brothers have a cancer company, so it's probably likely that it was something like that.
I don't know off the top of my head.
You should be doing PCR and not be doing PCR in clinical settings.
And that got me dragged into the Corman-Drawston review.
And then I've been doing some work very recently.
And the Corman-Drawston review is this paper that Claire Craig, Mike Eden, Thomas Binder, Kevin McKernan.
and a bunch of other people that all have some interesting contribution to 2020, 21 and 22.
Just take note, I'm quite certain that Claire Craig is on this team.
Before the pandemic, she was gathering genomes as a clinical pathologist and part of a 100,000 Genomes Project.
So she's on the same team for sure.
It's just a question of whether Mike Eden and Thomas Binder were included to make sure that
Mike Eden and Thomas Binder accepted Claire Craig and these other people as as real experts to, and they were kind of being absorbed into that paper or whether that paper is actually in retrospect and admission that these people are all on some kind of team.
I have the feeling.
that any of that is possible, but it's least likely for Thomas Binder.
I think Thomas Binder has shown the ability to say we should end the who.
Thomas Binder has shown that it's nonsense and said it's nonsense and had not gotten too deep in any particular argument or tried to be too specific with any argument.
Which was what Mike Eden did for a very long time, too.
It's only very recently that I've become worried about Mike Eden, and only because they've used him to promote people like Sasha Latupova, who are absolutely positively part of Team Robert Malone, as much as Meryl Nass is, or Mary Holland is, or any of these other people, CHD, who published his books, and they're all on that team.
I don't know who and how that hierarchy works or who they work for, but it seems likely that some player in there is Elon Musk and X, because in the beginning of the pandemic, all of these people were united in saying that the truth was being sorted out on X.
and that there was censorship on X. And then, right, then it kind of gets set up to fail and then Elon Musk rescues it.
And now those same people are still on X and still saying that X is the place and still promoting Elon Musk.
And Elon Musk is still promoting X as a really cool place.
And yet there is where you see all the censorship.
There is where you see all the nonsense.
That is where this guy attacked me for two and a half years.
there and Substack, another social media that popped up during the pandemic that everybody just takes for granted as being something that's useful.
But in reality, who is the controller of that platform has a great deal of power and a great deal of access to information and to see how people swim in schools of thought.
That's no different than what X is, except X has this added benefit of you scrolling.
And so it can actually put things that it wants you to see in front of you and not things that it doesn't want you to see.
And that whole process is taken for granted as some kind of algorithm that we influence with our behavior, which is absolutely positively.
That's the trap, but it's important to see that this guy said Twitter on my interview a year later, and he said it on Vance Crowe's podcast each time he was on it.
Not Facebook, not I'm trying to get it out on all platforms, or you can find me anywhere by looking up at Super Catman.
He's not on any other platform but X. Vance Crowe's not mentioning any other platform but X.
Where's his video listed?
He doesn't care.
It's Twitter that he likes.
I see something, Hen.
Yeah, I'm just looking at the mRNA structures with Peter McCullough and a few others.
Yeah, it's a really, now that I hear it put that succinctly, I'm kind of, well, I'm thoroughly humbled now, and I really feel like I'm definitely interviewing someone who I need to be interviewing, and that's really great.
Do you want to expand?
Look at that face.
This is a person who's doing a job here.
This is not a person who's giving away his free time because he's trying to save our grandchildren, or he really thinks this needs to get out.
This is really urgent.
This guy is working right now.
And not only is he working, but he seriously needs to achieve something here, and he's worried he might not achieve it.
That's what I see.
Because with Vance Crowe, he wasn't worried about it at all.
Hey, it's good to talk to you again, man.
I really miss talking to you about this stuff.
Or maybe it's a year later and he's just sick of this crap.
And it all, is there, has anything happened with the Corman Dorstan thing at all?
So that thing we've, we, we put that public, it got, the first one got attacked pretty heavily and we put a public, so we wrote like another 60 pages trying to explain all the references behind it.
That thing barely ever got read.
I don't even think Stephen Boston read it when he, when he reviewed the paper.
So there is, if you go to my Twitter page, go through the story that's on the top of that page.
What's really interesting about what's pinned up there is that the people who are trying to attack that paper are on record in court cases before attacking Steven Wakefield for the same damn PCR problems that are in the Drosten paper.
And they got Pete having all the evidence to do it.
Did he just plug Wakefield as being a guy who said some PCR problems?
Did he just plug Wakefield?
Holy balls.
Talk about laying it down thick and making sure no matter what lead you choose to chase down, you inevitably end up in a limited spectrum of debate curated by the show.
Whoa.
are on record in court cases before attacking Steven Wakefield for the same damn PCR problems that are in the Drosten paper.
And they got paid half a million pounds to do it.
Steven Buston got paid by Glaxo to take down Wakefield.
And he was attacking him for not having internal controls in the PCR.
So careful, right?
Because he's saying that somebody got paid to take down Wakefield, but then he's not going to talk about vaccines or what might have been covered up or all that story is going to be left for me to chase down.
This is a year after he was talking to Vance Crowe and he just happens to throw in Wakefield and PCR and Wakefield had the same problems.
That's actually him going and throwing stuff into my head, throwing stuff into my notes, throwing stuff into leads that I have to follow later.
And where will I end up?
Vaxxed.
Wakefield, the MMR vaccine, or maybe some component of it hurt my child.
Oh, wait, it's a fake paper.
No, it's not.
Directly into the trap.
or not, which, you know, Drosten had no internal controls.
At least, at least Wakefield tried to have an internal control.
It just wasn't performing appropriately.
Oh, I see.
You're right.
Andrew Wakefield.
Thank you very much.
Left-handed monkey wrench.
I'm confused.
That's good.
Good, good, good, good.
Don't be, don't, don't think that you're wrong there.
So who's Steven Wakefield then?
We have to look this guy up.
Sorry.
I'm going to stop here.
Steve.
Wonder who that would be.
I don't even know if that's someone.
No, that's not it either.
Is it Georgetown?
No, it can't be.
There's a lot of these guys.
Okay, well, we know that it's not that one.
I'm sorry.
I almost went a little bit nuts there.
But that's what happens when you get paranoid like this.
It's pretty impressive.
Maybe he was thinking of Steven Hatfield.
OK, sorry about that one.
That was a little glitch.
Had one.
Drosten doesn't even have one.
And then a lot of the other things that we've, you know, the protocol wasn't very clear.
A lot of the critiques that we put forward in terms of primer dimers and everything else, those things exist in the Drosten protocol.
He was on record in a legal case attacking Wakefield for those same things.
That's the reviewer that Euro surveillance could pull up.
Okay, so it must be another PCR test.
I apologize for that.
My bad.
I don't know who that is.
And I guess that's also, it's the same thing.
I'm supposed to chase that down.
If I don't know that paper, then that's something else I have to learn here, right?
Instead of looking at and talking about the biology of PCR and how it could be or not be, you know, we're, we're, we're, we're laying seeds that will get me lost.
It's the only one that went public.
They wouldn't put any of the reviews public.
Um, so we just have to go to the fact that he leaked some of this information on a podcast that he was a reviewer and he didn't even look at the primaries during the review, which is what our whole 60 page addendum was attacking.
So I don't know.
I don't have much hope that like clarifying that's going to end the pandemic, you know, back then.
No, I agree.
I agree.
And so much of that is technical that, that, that for the vast majority of the people that
could in theory be convinced a simple hand wave from the right person and that's gone.
But you brought up something twice in that in that description that that I really wanted to ask you about, which is, are there PCR tests that have what you would call a appropriate control?
Oh, yeah.
Yeah, there's a, I mean, there are, there are others tests out there that have internal controls.
They go off the RNase P gene and that helps them tremendously.
But what we're not seeing the industry do is pull out all the live dead PCR technology, which has existed for probably a decade.
It's been refined for a decade.
This is- Was that an answer?
I just asked an absolutely baller question.
Did he answer it?
I think we have to go back and you need to hear that again because he didn't answer it at all.
And that's a pretty amazing admission because he could have said, yes, this one is, this one is, this one is.
He's an expert in the PCR space.
A year earlier on the Vance Crowe podcast, you would have assumed that he was keeping track of all the different EUA products that were in America, or at least in Massachusetts.
And he could tell you that, well, there's three products that are being used in Massachusetts.
And this one goes after this gene, this one goes after this gene, and then this one uses the, uh,
the endogenous gene something, something, something.
What he's talking about is, are there, I asked him, are there prime PCR tests that have the appropriate multiple primers, have the appropriate nested, sorry,
multiple amplicons with nested primers or other controls to scale the PCR result to an endogenous gene like we do on the lab bench, which I'm familiar with already because I've done it in my little career before this.
And so that's a real pertinent question.
Does he answer it?
Or does he bamboozle me with expertise that I'm just not capable of processing at this time?
60-page addendum was attacking.
So I don't know.
I don't have much hope that clarifying that's going to end the pandemic.
No, I agree.
I agree.
And so much of that is technical that for the vast majority of the people that
Could in theory be convinced a simple hand wave from the right person and that's gone.
But you brought up something twice in that in that description that that I really wanted to ask you about, which is, are there PCR tests that have what you would call a appropriate control?
Yeah.
Yeah, I mean, there are others tests out there that have internal controls.
They go off the RNase P gene and that helps them tremendously.
But what we're not seeing the industry do is pull out all the live dead PCR technology, which has existed for probably a decade.
It's been refined.
So live dead PCR technology.
Think about that as an umbrella term and throwing that out there.
That doesn't exist.
Live dead technology.
You know, am I supposed to write that down in my notes and go Google that?
I mean...
for a decade, this is the capability to get PCR to tell you what's infectious virus, which is not infectious virus.
And they're not doing that for a very explicit reason, because that would have cut their revenues by an order of magnitude.
I mean, if you look at just the- Think about how amazing that line of bullshit is, that they have this technology of live dead virus technology, but they're just not using it, because otherwise that would cut their profits in half.
I mean, that is just, that is amazing.
How long people are infections versus non-infections is either five to tenfold.
And now, now they tell you don't get PCR tests for 90 days if you've been positive, right?
Because you might still be positive from the last infection, but you're not- How many, how many academic molecular biologists in your imagination should actually, by their own experience, know that these tests are, one, one, inadequate, and two, that there's technology that already exists that would have been better anyway?
What?
How many people should really know that?
Shouldn't there be thousands?
There should be.
Yeah, I think anyone in the molecular biology space or genomic space knows that there's live dead tools out there.
There's even stuff called live dead tools.
So you see the loop that he runs?
He doesn't acknowledge what I just said.
Which, if he was to be honest, would be like using multiple amplicons
using a control amplicon from the human so you could scale it, maybe running in triplicate, maybe using nested primers, maybe picking a gene that is specific for a, nothing about how the actual PCR tests work, but repeating this live dead virus technology three times now.
This is spectacular.
and malevolence at its highest level here.
And he's not happy about doing it.
This is a precision work here that he's doing.
Listen to it again, how he turns it around on me.
Pull out all the live dead PCR technology, which has existed for probably a decade.
it's
But how long people are infections versus non-infections is either five to tenfold.
And now they tell you don't get PCR tested for 90 days if you've been positive, right?
Because you might still be positive from the last infection, but you're not- How many academic molecular biologists in your imagination should actually, by their own experience, know that these tests are, one, inadequate, and two, that there's technology that already exists that would have been better anyway?
What?
How many people should really know that?
Shouldn't there be thousands?
There should be.
Yeah, I think anyone in the molecular biology space or genomic space knows that there's live dead tools out there.
There's even stuff published on SARS with this, that you can do live dead, you know, viability PCR on these things.
He just totally, I mean, that was, I don't know what you call that, but that is like the most amazing Jedi mind trick ever.
because he didn't answer my question and he threw out this idea of live dead tools again, that I wasn't talking about live dead tools.
I'm talking about using PCR in an objectively honest way where you apply the methodology to get high specificity and low error rates.
And he's going nowhere near that, but wants you to talk about live dead tools, which of course live dead tools, what?
It accepts the narrative of a novel virus, of RNA that can pandemic, of high fidelity sequencing tools and all the other stuff that his wealth and multi-generational potential, you know,
membership in the elite class is based on.
He's in the overclass right now because he has helped to bamboozle the world about what a gene is and how close they are to understanding all the genes and how genetics is so awesome.
He is one of a few very primary movers that has been, for better or for worse, necessary to be exposed publicly in order to control a narrative that very few people are in a position to control.
Only if you understand the illusion that is being sustained, the fidelity that is being exaggerated,
and the methodologies that are being oversold.
Are you capable of sustaining this illusion?
That's why this guy's on so many podcasts for so many years.
and not just keeping his head down working on pot, because he is part of the same team that Robert Malone is, the same team that Pierre Khoury joined in 2020, the same team that all of these people, I think, are on.
It is a team that is designed to help these global powers take advantage of and
minimize the consequences of this boomer generation on our economies and take advantage of the opportunity to create the illusion that RNA can pandemic so that they can enslave our children based on this mythology.
and so that they can test us genetically, keep track of all of our data to correlate back with our genetics because they're sticking to this mythology that with enough data and enough measurements and enough precision, that eventually the deterministic world that is determined by our genes would be able to be identified, monitored, harnessed, and enhanced.
It's all a lie, it's all bullshit, it's all never gonna work.
But that's what these people have believed for years and have been using it as an excuse to be subversive and malevolent and egoistic and elitist and lie.
And I just don't think there's any way that Kevin McKernan doesn't know.
given what his track record is for the last five years.
There are people who don't know.
It's possible that Pierre Khoury knows there's something but doesn't want to know.
That's called the look-away doctrine in our system.
If you work for the DOD and you know that behind that curtain over there is something very hee-hee sketchy going on, you know, the look-away doctrine is how you don't know about it, so then you don't have to say anything.
You know, sometimes they use the words plausible deniability, but it's even better than that.
It's part of their system.
It's why things need to be compartmentalized.
It's why you only get read into what you need to know.
And a lot of these people have only been read into what they need to know.
Stick to ivermectin and you'll be fine, Pierre-Corey.
Stick to VAERS and you'll be fine, Jessica Rose.
So it's not like, I mean, if you just Google search it, you'd find it.
But the problem is that there's so many people they sweep up in that tail of PCR positivity when you're no longer infectious.
And then that explodes into a contact map of everyone else you're in contact with.
So everybody's infectious, but because this PCR signal lingers for so long, there's a lot of false positives.
Team Robert Malone working hard here.
they're sweeping in an enormous number of clinically false positive leads.
I mean, yes, technically the RNA is there, but they're not infectious.
And so I call that a clinical false positive.
And that's probably the bigger problem than all the, the Drosten things are more like analytical false positives, right?
Like your primers hit the wrong shit, or you haven't proven to us that this doesn't hit other viruses like the flu.
Those are things you can get in the weeds on with a molecular biologist, but I think the real thing is damaging society,
is that the way PCR is currently calibrated, which is very rarely against virocells, and very rarely through a viability check, even
When it's deployed, you have this long tail of people that are positive with RNA.
What did he just say?
Again, again, remember part of the shtick is to bamboozle you with, with information that you don't understand and make no effort at all to bring you to understand it.
This should be the polar opposite of what you see in my progression and my progression of presenting these ideas.
I haven't gotten more complicated.
I haven't gotten an adding more details that make it even harder for you to see the big picture.
I have been trimming this tree since I realized that I was lost in the forest for a long time.
I've been trimming, trying to get to an elevator pitch that people can digest.
This is not what's happening here.
Through a viability check, even, even
When it's deployed, you have this long tail of people that are positive with RNA that aren't infectious.
They get sweeped in, they get contact traced, and all their contacts get PCR'd.
It just creates this huge explosion of PCR activity that effectively just shuts down society.
But in your space for botanicals and whatever, you have to have a pretty specific, I mean, you must have run
quite a lot of checks to be sure that what you're testing for is really there and that you're not producing a test that... Well, I mean, that's what drives me nuts is these are clinical tests going on humans.
We have more controls testing candidates.
I mean, it's like there's an internal control on every one of our tests.
You have to have, in order for you to have a viral load, which is what everyone's talking about, you have to have two different CTs.
You can't just have one.
You need to have... So he's giving me an argument to make that these tests have to have two different
amplicons, and that's not a good argument.
Because I've made the argument since that one amplicon's not enough.
That one amplicon would never be enough for nature, it would never be even enough for the Journal of Neuroscience.
You gotta have more than one amplicon or you don't know for sure what you're looking at.
And those amplicons should amplify at a similar level in order to validate one another.
That's a different control than the gene that you expect to be there because you're swabbing a nasal cavity of a human, and this gene is always there, that you will then scale those two against.
And he's not talking about the fact that these could be further specified by
by using nested primers, which would further specify the sequence that was amplified, but none of these tests use nested primers, which is something that's almost bench standard in academics.
Instead, he's talking about
live dead technologies, which I still think are just really, stop lying.
And then there's this stuff that he's saying now here, which is just absolutely extraordinary.
One amplicon for the test and one amplicon in control is not the solving of the problem, but that's what he's telling me right here.
For botanicals and whatever, you have to have a pretty specific, I mean, you must've run
quite a lot of checks to be sure that what you're testing for is really there and that you're not producing a test.
I mean, that's what drives me nuts is these are clinical tests going on humans.
We have more controls testing candidates.
I mean, there's an internal control on every one of our tests.
You have to have, in order for you to have a viral load, which is what everyone's talking about, you have to have
two different CTs.
You can't just have one.
You need to have the host CT, and you need to have the virus CT.
So you have a ratio of virus to host.
When you just skip the host, you have no clue what that number means.
There's been papers published showing there's about a 10,000 fold variance, 1,000, 10,000, it's a paper called DADU, in swabbing your nose.
That's the variance in the number of cells you can have.
Can you do that all in the same tube then?
Or do you have two separate samples?
Yeah, you put primers in there that have fluorophores that go off in different columns.
And there are some PCR kits that do this in the coronavirus space, so I don't mean to disparage.
And so he said you do that with primers that have fluorophores of different colors.
So essentially, you are trusting the manufacturer of the PCR test to make primers that won't go together and make positive, or what will go only to become fluorescent when amplifying these, you see?
So he's not really telling us the truth here because all the primers don't have fluorescence.
Well, maybe in some tests they do, but it doesn't matter.
What you're hearing here is again, a person saying and confirming that PCR tests could be used to track a virus.
He's saying that there is a virus obviously to track, but there are these weird aspects of the signal that make it easy to misconstrue as being dangerous when it's not dangerous and miss it when it is dangerous or something like that.
all of them and call them all Drosten.
But the ones in the human space, they measure RNAs P, which is a gene that's human, and they compare that CT value to the CT value you get from the virus.
Now you have a numerator and a denominator, and you can call a viral load.
And according to the Mikey guidelines that Bust and Drosten and self-authored spelled this out very clearly, you don't have a viral load without two numbers.
you need both.
But there is a lot of PCR out there in the coronavirus space where they're just skipping ignoring the internal control and just saying if we get any signal out to 30.
And so now the other thing to realize is is the the disparity here that even if you believe their their illusion of viruses when they look at these RNA constructs in vitro
What they find are is that certain subgenomic RNAs are orders of magnitude more abundant than the full genome sequence and more abundant than many of the most crucial proteins that are most crucially conserved, like the RNA-dependent RNA polymerase and the helicase and the N-protein.
Although you do make quite a bit of N and E, because N is necessary to wrap up.
And in fact, Ralph Baric already showed that just with the N protein alone, you already get viral particle production.
And in fact, if you go to my sub stack that everybody seems to ignore, where I talk about that, that
incomplete bibliography, you can see that I've gathered a whole bunch of random articles out of the virology literature where every one of these articles that's using a synthetic RNA as a starting point to generate their viral particles also co-transfects with the N-protein RNA alone, because as they say in their own methodologies, we get a lot more particles if we do it this way.
And so they've already known for a very long time that cells in culture can package RNA.
They've already known how to entice them to do it.
because it's a natural processes that cells do in all different contexts that we are wholly unaware of because we haven't been paying attention to it because they have told us for the last 40 years that everything that you isolate in this fraction in a sucrose gradient is exclusively viruses.
That's what meadow biota told us, that's what David Baltimore tells us, that's what Ralph, sorry, Ralph Baric would tell us, that's what Vincent Rack and Yellow would tell you, that they all would tell you that.
And this guy just told you that he was part of a whole series of technologies that was involved in that very thing, identifying viruses and infractions that were isolated.
So we are really talking about the sustaining of an illusion of molecular biology.
It's an illusion of fidelity.
It's an illusion of simplification.
It's an illusion of command over a system that they don't have, a breadth of understanding that they do not have.
And it's all based on an elaborate
elaborate collection of assumptions which ultimately goes all the way back to the idea that life on earth is just physics and chemistry that we haven't managed to delineate yet.
We haven't managed to describe all of the laws and processes that are involved, but essentially the pattern integrity that is us is just explainable by a very wonderful combination of physics and chemistry, and that is the seductive lie
that all of these people in one way or another are participating in, believing in, assuming to exist.
It's an atheist kind of thing.
And you can disguise that as an appreciation for the universe, an appreciation for creation, an appreciation for the sun, an appreciation for nature, an appreciation for Gaia.
But then you're never acknowledging that this perfection could have never come into existence without a creator.
And you're never humbly submitting yourself to the will of the creator then.
You're inevitably going to be tricked into believing that we as a species have risen to have lordship and stewardship over creation in a way that we are not, no, supposed to take.
Stewardship's the right word.
Lordship's the wrong word.
We are supposed to be the gardeners of the earth.
We were given a beautiful gift that we are instead treating as if it's something that we need to remake in our own image or some bullshit like that.
And this is really dangerous because all of these people, like it or not, are contributing to this collective consciousness, this noosphere that is being amplified on social media to get everybody to believe that we're going to a continuous gender, multiracial, global community with a unity religion and a unity party.
And our kids are gonna love it.
And that's the UN, that's the City of London, that's the Vatican, that's Washington DC, and all these weirdos of the Human Genome Project, and the CEBA Foundation, and Gavi, and the UN, they're everywhere.
And they're all not fighting for America's grandchildren.
And that's all I can fight for because my kids live on this dirt.
So I, by definition, it's totally okay for me to want this dirt to be free, to want this dirt to be prosperous, to want this community and this land to be free.
I don't know what the rest of you can do in the world.
I know you're all in the same trap.
I know that you're all falling for the same gag because we're all falling for the same gag.
Our children are all being offered the same poison fruit.
It's all different forms and different shapes, but it's all the same.
It's all the same.
And Russell Brand and this guy are all the same.
And now that I see it, and...
As clearly as I think I do, it also feels very, very, it's empowering because I know that we can fight this.
I know that we can teach our children to see it.
I know that we can teach our family and friends to see it.
And I know the personal attacks can end.
I feel bad for the people that are helping this along because I don't think that any of them got into this thinking that they were going to be involved in something like this.
I don't think Kevin McKernan's dad knew that getting into microarray of technology was contributing to these ideas.
I don't think Kevin McKernan knows that all of his work has contributed to these ideas.
He might know where these exaggerations are taking place, where these assumptions are allowed to sit.
But in the end, it's a look-away doctrine thing.
They know only as much as they need to know and they keep everything else out of their mind because this is how it goes.
Otherwise, if they accept what they are a part of and how this is going, then inevitably their whole existence will be put into question.
And so if one department of the university, like the sociology department, is just going full rainbow trans nonsense, and the trans studies department is getting millions of dollars in grants, the biology department is not going to say anything.
The Department of Neurobiology isn't going to say anything about what transgender might be in certain cases.
None of those biologists are going to stand up to the social sciences that are in the same university because they
engage in the same kind of look-away doctrine.
It's just that behind the curtain is not a bunch of people being tortured for intelligence, it's a bunch of students being taught things that they know are wrong.
They're not going to help those students, but them taking their tuition is as important as them bringing in grant money.
And they've got to keep their head down in order for that to be a successful venture and for them not to catch any flack.
And so the chemistry department and the biology department and the psychology department shut up about that, those departments and vice versa.
And that's no different than a guy from the Human Genome Project shutting up about what the Human Genome Project has become and not become and how the NIH and the NIAID and all of these large funding corporations are using the illusion that was created by the exaggeration of the Human Genome Project to forward all of their ideas.
He just doesn't wanna lose what he has.
And so when they ask him to help out, he does it.
Very reluctantly and made him very angry by the end of this this the year after this.
He was fed up with me and My chemtrail retarded ideas Seven positive, right and they will fuse to sequence anything I think the CDC only sequences stuff below 28 and I see how the labs doing it below 32 and
So they don't really have sequence validation on the stuff past 32.
All that stuff could be noise.
It could be influenza.
It could be other coronaviruses.
We don't know.
They're not sequencing that stuff.
I see.
And that 32 number kind of lines up with probably what you've seen from Didier Riel's lab.
The paper out of, I think it was Jessica Jabbar,
Didier Real from France was just plugged in.
He was the guy who kind of seeded the hydrochloroquine as it might have worked.
I don't know.
I may have no readage apart.
She did this work where they calibrated PCR on Vero cells to show what CT they stopped performing PFUs.
And you should know Vero cells are hyper
they're very sensitive to this virus.
If you compare... But one of the things that's interesting that Mark and I have been talking about behind the scenes is that even PCR from the perspective of qPCR, he's talking about calibrating quantitative PCR so that the cycle count where the reaction goes exponential is a useful number.
So you can use PCR in multiple ways.
One of the ways to use PCR is a yes or no.
Either the PCR amplifies an amplicon and then you say yes it's there or you run it for 45 cycles and nothing amplifies and then you say no it's not there.
And then there's another way to use PCR where you know it's there or you're assuming it's there and then you take the data from when the exponential
Curve sets in you take that as an indication of some kind of quantity because again if there was less
And this is going to be wrong.
It should have been this way, I guess.
If there was less, then that curve would be over here.
And it would amplify in, or sorry, over here.
And it would be amplifying at a much higher cycle count, like at 40.
And if it was more abundant, it would amplify at 30.
And if it was more abundant, it would amplify at 20 cycles.
And so what he's talking about is a paper where they grew virus in Vero6 cells.
and they claimed to know how much virus they were growing and then they PCR'd it up to show or calibrate what kinds of viral numbers in their prep are equivalent to what cycle count in PCR in a nasal prep.
Which of course, if there's a background that any of these tests are detecting, then this whole idea is moot because there's a background signal and you're pretending that there isn't.
And so when you swab and you find the background signal, you're saying that it's something novel when it's a background signal.
And so again, we're not explaining that at all, but instead reinforcing a narrative that he sees that I have come to understand as evidence of a novel virus.
and trying to understand it.
Vero cells really make a lot of PFUs.
And so they found the number around 33 with their assay.
And so now I'm supposed to learn all the different cell types and how much virus they can make, and that should be in my new model of how I understand things.
It's a lot of noise.
It's a lot of meaningless details that have no real message here.
I still don't really know what his message is.
There's, there's a lot getting called above and beyond 32.
What is, what is PFU?
Is that like per?
Oh, PFU is a platform units, um, like, like colony forming units, these colonies back here, you can.
Plaque forming units, but that's talking about viruses.
This is bacteria behind him and using bacteria and counting plaque.
forming units was where the plaque forming unit thing came from in virology and he is equating the two as being equivalent and equal and I think one of the things that the no virus people like Mark Bailey have established very well is that the plaque assay is really nonsense and and quite frighteningly so and that's indeed
it's important that he reinforced that here.
Okay.
You count those, each one of those is a CFU.
With, with viruses, you make a lot of cells and then the plaques form where all the cells are dying.
I see.
Those are, those are each individual virions that seeded that death.
And so you count the plaque forming units.
And so he reiterates or, or, or recites the assumption that's made in the plaque forming assay in virology, but it's not the same as this.
It is not the equivalent of this.
In the viral plaque forming assay, you're looking for cytopathic effects in a cell culture.
Here, you're looking for bacterial growth.
It's really kind of funny, actually, when you see it now, that he's walking me right into it.
And the no-virus people are already, by this time, very much on it.
And they've already succinctly described why these plaque assays are bunk.
And it's, it's, it's amazing.
I see this now so clearly, it's, it's kind of scary.
Instead.
And so you measure a PFU curve and calibrate it to a CT level, and then you have a sense of, okay, this assay is picking up viability out at a certain time point.
I see.
Certain CT values.
I understand that so much better now than I've read it probably 50 times and I didn't really fully understand it.
That's funny.
Yeah.
But I don't do viruses, right?
I mean, just trying to read into this immunology and so much of it just doesn't make congruent sense.
I mean, I can't tell you all the details.
And that's why it's really interesting to talk to you.
So the next thing that, from a general biologist perspective, has been on my mind for a long time is the idea that
Moderna and Pfizer have told us that they have this sequence and they can make many good copies of it and then put it in our cells and they'll make very many good copies of a protein that will harmlessly provoke an immune response that we can rely on in the future.
And a lot of that seems odd, but the most odd of it was this calling it vaccination instead of transfection.
And I always understood transfection as being something that
I mean, when we did it to our mice, it was an endpoint after five or six weeks of having transfected a particular, let's say optogenetic protein in the brain, that area of the brain is also going to be a little bit unhappy.
Yeah.
Unhappy.
Let's say it like that.
Yes.
Yeah.
If you overdo it with the lipid nanoparticles, they become toxic to the cells.
So you can't, usually you have to go in at low MLI, low multiplicity of infection in order for you to get.
So there he goes throwing out another MLI, multiplicity of infection.
I mean,
He's just trying to bamboozle, just trying to make sure that no matter which way I move in the paint, he boxes me out and makes sure that I understand that the paint is his territory.
I'm not allowed to post up there.
You can cut through, but if you cut through, you're going to pay the price.
You're going to kick a forearm.
That's what he's doing here.
Law will listen to it.
It's impressive like that.
Yes.
Yeah.
If you overdo it with the lipid nanoparticles, it becomes toxic to the cells.
So you can't, usually you have to go into low MOI, low.
So the lipid nanoparticles are toxic to the cells too.
So you go into a low concentration so that they don't really get you see that wow.
Lipid nanoparticles.
Supposed to be an infection in order for you to get, um, those transfection systems to behave.
I've done, I've done some of the infection in the,
I can't say this about the lipid nanoparticles they're using because they've modified them, but the ones that we typically use.
Oh, they modify the lipid nanoparticles, so I have no idea if they're any good.
I assume they're better.
I mean, Robert Malone assumed they were better because Peter Cullis told him they were better.
That's why he took the shot.
In retrospect, if Peter Cullis wouldn't have lied to him, he would have never taken the shot in the first place and never would have forgot his vaccine card when he went to Rome with Stephen Hadfield.
I mean, wow.
This is amazing.
Using with betragen is surest way to destroy your cell lines is to put too much of it in there.
So I'm very skeptical of what they've claimed.
They've claimed they have these mRNAs that get transfected and then that they make this perfect spike protein.
They've never shown that.
I mean, unless your audience can find, I really hope someone can't prove me wrong here because I've been
There's now like so many millions of papers of SARS-CoV-2 out there.
It's very hard to dig through the literature and find exactly.
Oh, I've been looking.
So that's pretty convenient, right?
There's just so many papers.
I can't sort through it.
It's like, you know, it's possible maybe that Charles Rixey read a thousand papers in the first two years and he read all the wrong ones.
I mean, so many papers.
Yeah, but I do not find...
I've been looking for if anyone has found like dose, you know, if they have some range of what they expect to go into circulation or what they expect to be produced.
And the other thing that you were, you've written a paper about recently is the, the obvious unknown of post-translational modification and then how the protein itself is folded, given the fact that it's not the actual sequence they've, all the sequence in such a way.
Yeah.
So that's, that is, um, I think that's criminal in that it's technically a pro drug, right?
Because you're, you're giving us a sequence that you're transfecting into cells and you're asking yourselves to make the final drug without ever having to declare what the final drug is or prove the fidelity of making that final drug.
They got away with a hall pass.
So he says that it's a pro drug and that means it's criminal.
That's an interesting statement to make.
I don't think he makes that anymore.
I don't think he's saying that anymore.
I don't think he said that to Vance Crowe, for example.
Three times he was on Vance Crowe.
I don't think he said it.
Just to let you know, that's the truth there.
Like if this were some other drug that was a pro drug that your liver modified and turned into another drug, you'd have to have all these P450 studies, you'd have to have those three.
That's a really wonderful way to explain it.
I think a lot of people will, even some nurses and stuff would understand that if you point out that if this was a pro drug that had to go through the liver first, then you would have so many more checks and balances and tests and trials that would have needed to be done on all stages of that.
You'd have to prove what the final drug is.
They have no evidence that they're making a spike protein off of this MR.
I mean, they have, they have a couple, I shouldn't say no evidence.
There's papers out there where they take these things and they express them in other posts.
Right.
And I've seen a couple of 3D, you know, crystal structures of them.
They've all used modifications of it.
Like they put a twin strap on one end so they can purify these and crystallize them.
Or they're not, they're not using the pseudo-uridine template.
Sometimes they're putting them in DNA vectors and getting them to express, you know, so.
The actual mRNA getting injected into people and what actual peptide sequences that those mRNAs manufacture in cells, I can't find literature on.
Some people sent me material that were from Pfizer's disclosures, I think, to some European government agencies, which I can forward to you if you want to link into this chat.
Um, but, uh, they basically show that they have all types of problems in multiple different bands when they go.
I just imagine that this guy was able to present in front of the Senate and probably could have talked as long as he wanted to.
And he didn't say any of this.
There's DNA contamination and he's not promoting me.
He's promoting Buckhalter who says that the DNA was fine for his grandparents, just maybe not for his daughter.
And he's being promoted by CHD about the DNA.
He's interviewed by Mary Holland and Brian Hooker about the DNA.
And so now we're not talking anymore about whether the spike protein is produced or what these small RNA fragments that are also in there will produce or what these chemical alterations will do.
None of those issues are being spoken about at all by this guy.
But in this interview, he's going to make sure that I hear enough of them
and get confused by enough false leads that I'll be lost for another couple years and he can and Robert Malone can and Brett Weinstein can slowly but surely be elevated on X and other platforms and slowly elevated in front of people on social media to absorb all of the useful patriots in America.
instead of promoting them.
And that's why Steve Kirsch and Kevin McKernan are best buddies.
That's why Kevin McKernan and Jessica Rose are taking pictures together in foreign countries.
That's why Jessica Rose and Kevin McKernan are
They have to be part of the same group of narrative controllers.
That's why Jessica Rose is first and foremost a virologist, who instead of talking about the virus has been talking about VAERS for the first year and a half, and publishing with
Peter McCullough because, you know, a Canadian, Israeli, and a guy from Texas, I mean, what other combination can you imagine?
There's nobody in Texas who could do what Jessica Rose did in that cardiology paper with Peter McCullough.
I'm sure there was nobody else in Texas who could have done that, even though four of the largest medical center, research medical centers in the world are in Texas.
Like, I'm sure nobody else could have helped with that.
That had to be Jessica.
and try to express these in vitro, they get all types of fragmentation that occurs, and they don't know if that's fragmentation of the virus or stall points in translation, and the banding patterns they see on gels are smears.
And there's questions on them having to clarify, why are those smears not the right size, the anticipated size?
And that's all we can see from some of the regulatory disclosures.
So- So there is already him saying it's contaminated, it's not pure, there's no way to justify it, it's a pro-drug.
All these things are there,
So why when he gets in front of the Senate, doesn't he start with this?
It wouldn't have worked because it was transfection.
We already knew how this worked because at the same time, he's saying that it's the lipid nanoparticles that does, that hurts.
And that the concentration, he just said that like five minutes ago, that the concentration of the lipid nanoparticle, nobody really knows these are new ones, but the old ones, you have to avoid a certain level of multiplicity of infection or something.
He said, he is bullshitting me.
It's remarkable in retrospect how much he's bullshitting me.
It hurts.
What has me worried about what they did is they took a sequence that was already code unoptimized by a virus adapted to its host and decided to make it different.
They took a sequence that was already adapted to its host.
Stop lying!
And they code on optimized it again.
I mean.
The number of leads, the number of ideas, the number of hamster wheels that this, it's like, have you ever seen that old video game, Spy Hunter, and you can drop a smoke screen or you can drop CalTrips behind you and pop the tires of the cars that are chasing you?
This guy is dropping CalTrips like crazy.
I can't barely dodge them.
It is nuts.
We know this is now the most toxic protein probably in virus, right?
So if a virus has evolved a certain codon structure for a toxic peptide, the most toxic peptide of the virus, can we at least agree that this is the most toxic protein in the virus?
It probably has got the codon structure right.
And that it needs to make sure it's not lethal to the host so it can still survive transmission.
Look at me, look at me grinding there, just trying to, oh my gosh, this guy is so smart.
Oh my gosh, I can barely keep up.
Oh my gosh, this guy is amazing.
Supercharging this by codon optimizing it so it would express even more in human.
I mean, this is what, I'm not, I think I do, whenever you want to hyper express a protein, this is just what we do.
We codon optimize it, we put it behind a really heavy promoter, toss it into some cells that are gonna be sacrificial and just jack the expression of it up.
But you're doing this in cells you know you're gonna kill.
and then purify as much of the damn protein as you can.
That's not necessarily what you need to do to dose humans.
That's actually how you make biologics.
So this is not old tech.
They didn't need to retool anything.
Just needed to wash the vats out, rinse the hoses, maybe replace some of the hoses, but that's it.
We're there, ladies and gentlemen.
The curtain has dropped.
You shouldn't be necessarily aiming for maximum expression because when an RNA gets into a cell,
and starts making maximum expression, all types of triggers go off on the interferon system, being like, this could be cancerous.
Like, what the hell's going on here?
You could get apoptosis because you're expressing way too much protein in a particular cell.
So they did a lot of things to jack up the expression.
They put a beta-globin promoter on there, which is a pretty aggressive promoter.
They then codon optimized it, which didn't need to be done, in my opinion.
And that creates all types of other problems.
When you codon optimize it, you don't know that the translation is going to go at the same speed anymore.
It may slow down due to all types of knots in the RNA you've created by doing this.
like there are quadruplex G structures now that we know in the RNA.
Quadruplex G structures.
I was on that for about four months.
That was amazing because the, the RNA has a three-dimensional structure and by codon optimizing, we change the three-dimensional structure.
So it changes the speed and the, the tempo with which it's translated and therefore the folding.
Wow.
Much more frequent in the messenger RNAs than they are in the actual natural virus.
Does that make error rate go up then too, or?
It makes translation error go up.
It also attracts other types of regulatory proteins to the molecules because quadriplex G structures look like telomeres.
And so telomeres are involved in sensitive.
Uh, if you, yeah, if you're looking at telomeres.
Telomeres.
Oh my gosh.
Guess who's all about telomeres.
That's Brett Weinstein's, you know, that's his wheelhouse.
That's his only real discovery that his brother says is one of the most extraordinary discoveries in modern biology.
That is spectacular.
That, that, that I'm sorry, that's ridiculous.
And so those things recruit proteins that are, that are involved in the life cycle of the cell that are involved in cancer and that involved in sensitive.
So, um, there's actually, why is he saying sensitive instead of senescence?
It's weird how he says it.
In SARS that are attractive to there's the NSP 13 protein is attracted to quadriplegics.
right?
So they now have much, I think there's like four in the natural virus.
It goes to like maybe nine and into the teens on the, on the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine.
So they're creating a lot more of these stall points and translation and other biological motifs that might alter the biochemistry of the cell.
Wow.
That's actually really, really good.
Super codon structure, plexing telomere adocious.
That's really actually extremely good.
Super codon structure plexing, telomere adocious.
McKernan saying this is really quite atrocious.
That's really, I mean, dude, you better log off because you're done for the day.
That was, that's a dunk right there.
That's nicely done.
The other thing that they did is they put a universal base in there known as pseudo-urine.
All right.
And many have probably heard about this.
The patents go to UPenn.
And so I've had another longtime viewer correct me on this a number of times.
It's not pseudo-uridine.
It's M1 pseudo-uridine.
And I'm not sure if he's just not being specific because he doesn't want to confuse his victim or if he's really not being specific to confuse his victim.
I've never heard it called a universal base before, though.
It's a degenerate base.
Yeah.
So it binds to, they won't call it that, but I built DNA sequencers on degenerate bases and those things were on a readoff for a reason.
Yeah.
So it binds to, it has pseudo-uridine being uracil, should have, it's like a thymidine replacement.
Okay.
So it should have a, it should have one of these AT pairs.
Right.
And unfortunately this thing also binds to G. It also binds to itself.
It also has some binding to,
to cytosine.
So this means that it's a very, very sticky base.
It can, it can flip around and bind.
If you actually look at its glycosic bond.
And I don't want to sound like an idiot, but this is the first time I've ever heard this for me.
I always just assumed it was a chemically different substitute for a single base.
It does.
It replaces it.
They're replacing all of the use with this because it's more RNase resistant.
Okay.
So it doesn't degrade as much.
So that meant, so you've now got a,
an RNA, you've codon optimized it, you put a heavy promoter on it, and now you also took away the breaks.
The breaks are usually RNAs that come in and chew up these messenger RNAs, but they put a long policy.
So what's weird about that is, is that if it binds with other bases, see, I'm still trying to figure this out because there's no double-stranded RNA.
So what does he mean when pseudouracil can bind with other bases?
What he must mean is that the codons that are made by it can bind other transfer RNAs.
Because otherwise, I don't really know what he means, that it can also pair with T. RNA is not double-stranded.
So when is it pairing like that?
And if he's talking about that, then what he's actually saying, oh my gosh.
We just realized it right now that what he's saying, and he might not want to say it, is that all these small erroneous RNAs that are part of this smear could potentially be
interfering RNAs, small regulatory RNAs, that because they are degenerate bases at the uracil position, that we could have many small RNAs that have kind of a multiple potential affinity for RNAs that they could downregulate, RNAs that they could misregulate.
So maybe it's hard to follow this, but small
mRNAs are known to regulate larger RNAs because double-stranded RNA, when a little RNA binds to a big RNA, you create a little patch of double-stranded RNA, can attract cellular enzymes that will degrade the RNA.
So if you have a bunch of RNA transcripts in the cell, and you want to downregulate some of them, you make, apparently, is what these people tell us, and in fact, they just gave a Nobel Prize out to some guy who works on this.
They, oh no,
I see it.
Because they gave a Nobel Prize to a guy who was working on microRNAs, but they didn't give him a prize for microRNAs.
Do you see?
And his discovery of micro RNAs should surely tell us that putting small degenerate base containing RNAs into our cells would be a very, very open-ended experiment because we wouldn't know what RNA transcripts those degenerate micro RNAs could potentially interact with if all of these bases are wobble bases.
It doesn't even need to be specific anymore.
And so instead of pointing that out, he's pointing it out from the perspective of what protein gets made, but he's not pointing it out from the perspective of what all those other unintended RNAs will do because they have a degenerate sequence that might overlap with endogenous RNAs.
I'm sorry, but this is huge.
Okay, this is why we review these things.
This is why I'm doing it because I don't have any face to lose here.
I got 3,100 followers on Twitch and I've had 14,000 followers on Twitter for the past two years.
I have nothing to lose here except for a few people, and those few people I'm not going to lose because I know.
I have to keep going, I have to keep pushing this because there is a chance that this biological illusion, this mythology can be dispelled.
This generation, with these young people, they can be brought to see what happened during the pandemic and we can teach them enough of this biology so that they can see through it for their generation, for their children.
I really see it as a distinct possibility right now.
Lay tail on this, and they put these pseudo-uridines in there so that the RNases can't touch it.
Now, there's a consequence to doing that, is when you camouflage these things from RNases, you also start triggering a lot of the toll receptors to get malfunctioned, like toll receptor 3, 7, and 8 could all scurry with pseudo-uridine.
But that's a separate topic we can bench for later.
The thing I want to get across is that,
the base that they have in there is not very specific.
And so, when you don't have specific reading, you can get all types of mispronunciations.
That doesn't even seem possible, but it is.
Vilma just dropped in an original research paper from November of 2023 about VAERS, which is written with Jessica Rose and Daryl Rickey, the guy who published with
Oh my gosh.
That's pretty amazing.
Uh, that is pretty amazing.
Jessica Rose and Daryl Rickey.
Um, wow.
I don't, I don't know what to say about that.
That's pretty shocking.
Um,
Anyway, we're just going to keep going as best we can.
I hope this is not too, um, I do have to go in about a half an hour because I need to take a break.
I have a way game at two o'clock and that has a very quick, I'm going to have to do a lot of talking for that away game.
And then I also, um, I also, uh, I also need to still be able to play ball tonight.
So let me see what we got going here.
20 minutes.
Wow.
This is a 50 minute video or a 40 minute video.
Wrong one.
Finding.
You can get all types of hairpin formations to form.
But more importantly, this will create errors in replication in DNA.
But the errors that are actually orders of magnitude more frequent are errors in translation.
Your tRNAs then have to come in and read this thing.
And when you have universal bases in there, they get all confused.
And the translation errors go through the roof.
And there's a couple of papers I can point you to.
You're bumping your microphone or something.
Oh, I am.
My hands are on it.
Sorry.
There must be a problem.
Sorry.
So when you have this universal base in there, it not only confuses polymerases, but it more readily confuses the tRNAs and the ribosomes.
They have a much harder job of having to put these triplet codons in there.
And when one of the bases is mismatching to multiple different bases, the transcription, I'm sorry, translation errors go through the roof.
Right.
Now there's a paper on there that tries to measure these translation errors with pseudouridine.
And they measure like, they can detect it,
when there's like one pseudouridine in there.
And what we know from these mRNAs, every uracil is replaced with these.
So they're getting codons invariably that have multiple pseudouridines underneath these tRNAs.
There's no way that thing creates high.
Okay, so then why not?
Why not start here, then this is a great reason not to jab people because the protein that you're making will never be pure because of the degenerate basis.
He's explaining it right here.
So we don't need double stranded DNA to blame because they're the original
the original the actual pure product even on a cartoon pure level would still be inappropriate because it wouldn't create the fidelity of antigen or epitopes that you that are drawn in the cartoon or are on the Moderna drawing because that's not how the these pseudo-uridine bases will will do you see
so why isn't he telling everybody that transfection in healthy humans is criminally negligent because
The wobble bases mean that they're not making good spike protein.
They're not making whatever they say they're going to make.
So even if it isn't a toxic protein, even if it isn't, or the codon optimization doesn't hurt, the bottom line is, is that the fidelity of the technology is being exaggerated and its usefulness for augmenting the immune system is being exaggerated.
But this guy can't say it.
You just said that they could detect the translation errors when there was only one?
Yes.
And these things have replaced all of them.
That's a huge statement.
Again, I'm learning a lot of this for the first time.
I did not realize that this was this awful.
Wow.
Now here's another thing that's really spooky about, at least the Pfizer one, is there's some papers out there that show when you put pseudouridine in the stop codons, the ribosomes read through it.
And they sometimes frameshift on the way through it.
It means they keep translating the RNA sequence that's past the double stop codon.
So you have to ask, what's on the three prime end of the Pfizer UTR?
Like, what do they have back there?
And we went and scanned all those things.
And there's actually a human peptide on the other end of that that could get expressed as a chimeric protein.
We've got no evidence for this in vivo.
This is just all in silica stuff that we're looking at.
if pseudouridine ablates that SOP codon, what does it read into?
And it reads into a fairly long peptide that has some homology to GP130, but we don't know much more about it.
The data in NCBI is pretty sparse on whatever that thing is.
But some of that's in the paper we put together with Peter McCullough as to what the human peptide is and what does that mean if some,
There's some error rate here, and I'm not suggesting every single spike protein that comes off this mRNA is going to do this.
These error rates happen at frequencies that are very low, but you have to keep them in context to how many molecules they're injecting into you.
They're injecting trillions of these things into you, right?
So those numbers, times an error rate that some I've seen, 10 to the minus four, 10 to the minus fifth rate,
they matter, they matter.
You could get chimeric proteins that come out of this that have human SARS chimerase.
So no mention of this now with regard to the DNA contamination, no mention of this when he was given a platform to speak in front of the U.S.
Senate next to Robert Malone and Meryl Nass and Pierre Cory, no mention of this at all.
It was very specific that there's double-stranded contamination in what apparently would otherwise be okay.
And if it's not okay, then why isn't he taking that time to explain all of this that he could explain to me in December of 2021?
And, you know, what does it do?
Does it create autoantibody issues?
Does that create autoimmune issues?
I mean, the long story short is these are all hypotheses.
Autoantibodies.
Wow.
So, you know, the only way that they would get autoantibodies from a transfection is if, in this scenario, the pseudouridine reads through the double stop codon and translates what's on the other side, which happens to be a human protein.
So if I took that bait and went for it for the next six months and said, everybody, hey, guess what?
Kevin McKernan taught me that it reads through the double stop codon and there's a human protein that could cause auto antibodies.
Now I'm selling their product.
Because if they would just fix that problem, it would go away.
I'm not, it would be no different than buying into the double-stranded DNA.
If they could just get it out, it would be okay.
Here, he's actually telling us some things that make it never okay.
But he's never said that.
Only I have been able to say that transfection in healthy humans is criminal.
Only me.
He said something else was criminal.
Right?
And it wasn't this.
It was the idea that it was a pro-drug.
And so what?
The expression of the protein is not dangerous.
It's whatever protein is produced that's dangerous and whether or not that protein is good or not.
So all of the stories that are found in this interview up until the moment of 23 minutes, all of the stories completely absolve
transfection as a methodology from any general role in the damage being done.
It is specific aspects of it that include the lipid nanoparticle, that include the pseudouridines, that include the mistranslation, that include the tail of RNA fragments,
The lack of purity.
All of these are reasons why the shot could never be okay and was always criminal.
And yet now in 2024, this man isn't saying any of these things.
He hasn't gotten better at saying them.
He hasn't gotten better at summarizing them.
He's gotten better at forgetting them and never mentioning them again.
For me, they became a list that got longer and longer and longer of all the reasons why we should stand up and not allow this.
And for him, the list has actually changed over time.
as has his interweaving connections with CHD and Robert Malone and this whole Senate hearing every year and international COVID summits.
He is a weak link in that chain, ladies and gentlemen.
He's a kink in their armor because, like Pierre Kory, there is no way to explain why someone like him would waste so much time on some nobody like me.
This is a many, many hundreds, you know, probably hundreds of millionaire kind of person.
who does not need to be on Twitter telling people that my, my, my ideas are chemtrail retarded.
He has no need to do that.
There's no explanation for it at all.
Other than to make sure that I never really stepped back far enough to realize how far I was fooled and kept vigorously arguing with them.
And now all I can do is humbly submit to you that they fooled me as best as I've ever been fooled in my life.
And if it wasn't for the grace of God and the faith of my wife in me, I would have never pulled my head out.
And I would have never had the guts to ask to present to Bobby, to send him an email that then provoked a podcast that will go down in history.
with Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Robert Malone, Meryl Nass, Jessica Rose, and Tess Laurie, all on the same podcast to try and dilute what I would say in the first seven minutes.
And that's a whole year after this.
And that's still more than a year and a half before today.
It's really crazy where we are, guys.
Disease that haven't been explored.
They're in silica.
But you do have to ask, why did Pfizer and Moderna, these people, get away with getting the prodrug certified without ever having to show their hand on what the hell these things make in human cells?
I've dug up a couple of papers in that paper with Peter.
on, okay, there's a couple other images in papers that look like this could be happening.
Like when you ever, there's one great paper out there, I think from Bancel that looks at like spikes, spike proteins that are expressed in exosomes, right?
In the blood, they showed them like four months later, really interesting.
Exosomes.
Exosomes, exosomes.
I have no responsibility for the current pandemic.
That is awesome.
They do have some like SDS page images of what they, of those exosomes and they're smeary.
He said it again.
He said exosomes again.
He said it again.
Jiang et al that, that, um, showed these, uh, showing fragments and, and, and they're, they're the fragments that were getting expressed at the spike protein.
They weren't all full length.
they were different based on the cell fraction they isolated them from, right?
And I think that was even with the DNA vaccine that didn't have the pseudo-uridium problems, right?
So you can imagine that would get even worse if you had all these other complications put in there.
So my concern is we don't really know what these vaccines are producing.
We don't know the fidelity of it.
We suspect there's some spike protein because there's motifs that look like spike proteins because antibody studies, but we only have antibodies.
So it's kind of like the people, you know,
blindfolded doctors touching the elephant, right?
You know you got some similarity, fine.
But we don't precisely know the diversity of what's getting expressed in humans.
Nice.
And we only have antibody studies, so we really don't know what they look like or what form they are.
And so we're really taking their word for it, like doctors feeling an elephant with the blindfold on.
But he's never actually going to allow us to get to the point where we could realize that the national security state, with the help of people like him going on podcasts, could use bullshit PCRs on a
on a hot background to convince us of whatever they wanted to convince us of.
And if we accepted it and taught this to our kids, it would literally be the end of everything.
Wow, that's impressive.
And we should be concerned about that because these LMPs don't target particular sound lines that go everywhere.
So that's a much broader problem.
If you knew that, okay, we're expressing
Some fragmented spikes, but we've got them well-characterized, the data's public, and they're going only to cell lines that the virus sees, like ACE2 expressing cell lines or CD147 expressing cell lines.
Fine, you've got an understood complexity of the problem.
When you start using these LMPs, they transfect every cell they touch.
So now you've got to worry about not just what does spike toxicity do in those, what does all the degenerate products of low-fidelity spike expression do to many more cell lines?
It can really blow up like the complexity of the problem.
And even perhaps the symptomatology right we Right, right.
It's this is blowing my mind because it didn't really The, the, the extent to which this this adds variables is really breathtaking actually
It's been frustrating me because I've heard so many arguments online that, oh, it's just the spike protein that's identical to what's in the virus.
No biggie, right?
So you shouldn't, your symptoms, your adverse event profile.
So you see how this hamster wheel is so well constructed that it moves so smoothly and keeps you from ever turning and facing the real question is, was there something?
Are we really detecting anything?
You're not really asking that question.
You're not really asking about the possibility of a background that these people are misconstruing as a high fidelity signal.
We are taking his word for it.
I'm taking his word for it that there are flaws, but there is a signal to be found.
And that assumption is what gets you in the trap.
There is a signal.
I mean, it's strange.
We got sick.
People got sick.
We agree.
I mean, come on.
should be a subset of what you get from the virus, because we're giving you a subset of the virus.
We're not giving you the full replicate of competent virus.
I don't think that theory should be accepted blindly, because we're injecting these things into more varied cell lines.
We are injecting them, I think, at a higher concentration.
I mean, the way, how do you read those antibody studies, right?
You see that they have higher antibody expression against spike, right?
I don't read that as like a better immune response.
I read that as you're expressing more spike.
And so the antibodies are probably a proxy to the expression level of spike.
And is that a good thing?
Do you really need massive amounts of spike protein to build an immune response?
Because we have to be careful here, spikes are toxic peptides.
So we're debating whether it's a toxic peptide and how much of it should there be and whether or not the antibody levels are correlated with the amount of spike protein that was expressed.
This is all just amazing.
Ladies and gentlemen, I'm going to wrap it up here.
I might watch the rest of it with you tomorrow.
I might dare to look at it again.
Um, I, I don't know.
I'm, I'm impressed.
Um, I'm impressed because, uh, I, I didn't think it was going to be quite this hard.
Um, but it is, uh, if you look back and you really see what happened, I mean, there's going to be hours and hours of evidence of me being fooled and the, the video that's next to that, um, on my website, uh, let me escape from here or out of here.
And if you look at my website here and we go to, let's see, what is this?
You can first of all go back and you can see the earlier ones in April and in May where he's talking about the same things.
You can also see Allison Morrow cut her teeth early on in 2020 on the same podcast with him.
So it's a reared confluence of people that did pretty well in 2020 and 2021 developing podcasts and he was on all of their shows.
Um, and then also if you go to, um, GigaOM's archive here and you go down to where Kevin McKernan, the friendly times, I didn't even notice.
I said that the raw interview.
And then this one is actually really interesting because this is the stream that I do right after it.
And boy, am I bamboozled?
Like I.
I nail it in the sense of auditioning for the role that I would be given as advisor for Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
And remember that right after this, like, let's see when this is.
Does it say?
Can I see it?
If this thumbnail shows up on Vimeo, then I can see it.
Ah, yeah.
21st of December.
See, so this is like a week afterward.
And in those days I was preparing a new slide deck all the time.
I wasn't going on every day.
And so this is a really interesting video also to watch.
It's going to reveal exactly how fooled I was.
And exactly why a lot of the people that were paying attention to me at the time were completely fooled.
Because I was pretty good at selling it.
And I think I'm also pretty good at selling my humble submission that I was wrong.
And I'm pretty good at explaining it, but a lot of these people just don't want to hear it.
And that's how they get away with it.
They don't talk about 2020.
They don't talk about a background signal or how PCR can work, or even in its purest form, like we heard from Kevin McKernan, it would never work the way they said it would.
And transformation and transfection is something we've been using for a long time, even if Kevin McKernan says,
He can't really say anything because they changed the lipid nanoparticle for this one.
And infectious clone is something he could have taught me about here.
But of course, one of his jobs is to make sure that everybody thinks that that's a chemtrail retarded idea instead of explaining how virology is an illusion.
And RNA cannot pandemic.
If you knew that, then you wouldn't buy any of this.
So endemicity versus background is the illusion, or at least one of the illusions they won't talk about.
Placebos, another illusion they won't talk about.
Thank you very much for joining me.
The vaccine schedule sucks.
Transfection does too.
And RNA can't pandemic.
Thank you very much for joining me.
I'll see you again tomorrow.
I do have an away game, so I got to end quick.
GigaOMBiological.com and Stream.GigaOMB.bio.
Thanks very much.
See you.
Drill-tard friends.
Nice one.
How does it go?
I gotta say it.
I gotta go scroll back up here for super something something.
Super codon structure-plexing telomere-adocious.
Supercoat on structure flexing, telomere adhocious.
Kevin McKernan saying this is really quite atrocious.
Stop lying!