Since my first days on progressive websites and a few mainstream ones (when comments were allowed), I was always able to see the disruptors in the comments whenever certain trigger words/subjects were broached. Always the same pattern. Very good at disrupting threads or posting insane/vile crap so normies move on and the rest waste their time on some form of troll. Obviously much later it was disclosed that corporate and gvt actors, employees and activists were paid to disrupt. We have the 77th recently. We have countless examples of 'agitators' through the ages.
I also saw the fanatics who believed everything was caused by their obsession, portrayed beautifully by the hordes of "Tories/Brexit caused this" zombies of recent years where no feat is beyond their bête noire. But I saw it also with climate cos totally RWP was caused by Roman tin smelting and forest clearance or that the Tokhu earthquake was climate change!
We also know that behind ever plot to kill people by means of terror, there's usually a intelligence agent from somewhere stoking the hate and/or supplying the means. Not new by any means but it's changed a wee bit from the machinations of the court of old. You could easily see Lewandowsky in Medieval court.
What I'm really trying to say is online has been 'nudged' for quite some time and the nudging has only got more nefarious and sophisticated as time progressess. It's no conspiracy theory, It's a global problem with every country pretty much engaged in it against their own people and their adversaries at home and abroad with legions willing to fall behind whatever the message is rather than rational open discussion where the clear intent is to learn.
I trust very few online for that reason. Some of these people could be fantastics, disruptors, trolls or agents or idiots. As a very old saying goes 'Do not give what is holy to dogs; and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under foot and turn and maul you.'
I don’t think the science matters as much as the WEFers et al. stealing our future. Doubt and debate in science is surely a good thing but being forced into a digital panopticon is definitely bad. Of course they use this faux science to justify their actions. For the good of the people is always the alibi of tyrants. I don’t know if there was a pandemic? I heard the numbers of global deaths hardly budged. But that’s the old fashioned definition of a pandemic anyway - I still navigate with a map sometimes. Good thing we don’t have to choose but I always keep RAW’s maxim of maybe logic on the nightstand of life.
"The argument that Bruttel et al. put forward was that SARs-CoV-2 was unique in its even distribution of certain enzyme cut sites that are commonly used with Golden Gate genome assembly strategies. I previously put together a substack on the nature of these interesting TypeIIs restriction enzymes that helps explain why they are such handy tools for generating scar-less or ‘no see-um’ synthetic genome assemblies.
The ZooCrew screamed “Coincidence“.
But now, Emily Kopp from The US Right to Know (USRTK) has obtained additional detail about the DEFUSE proposal that is far more than a smoking gun but ,in fact, is more analogous to finding the gun, fingerprint and confession note in one place.
Emily found evidence that this proposal also listed the very restriction enzyme (BsmBI) that Bruttel et al. claimed could build the virus. Not only did Bruttel et al. notice that BsmBI sites were conveniently evenly spaced throughout the viral genome and this spacing was not only NOT observed in other CVs but that this approach made complete sense as a logical path to manually assembling the genome.
Low and behold the DEFUSE proposal actually contains NEB R0580S part numbers to order these very enzymes to construct the virus in the manner Bruttel et al. predicted.
This is a case closed event!
There is no more debate. C19 was made in a lab. Which lab and when is still a hot topic but it didn’t come from a pangolin courting a bat."
I have taken viruses for granted, and still do. However, I am quite unsure that a naturally spreading viral pandemic is an appropriate description of what we experienced in the last 3 years.
I have looked a Denis Rancourt's analysis of ACM and it does show a very strange area localized pathogen that is not just spatially nonsensical it is also temporally odd.
I downloaded some data and made a first stab to see what I could see but got lazy, and eventually stayed with the analysis of Rancourt and plots from our world in data. That certainly puts me in a position to posit little.
I think anyone who looks at this in a world wide basis must have serious questions about this pandemic description. Those who looked at the data since the rollout of vaccines must have a serious question about the trend of ACM, and, I don't mean just for the old follks.
For myself, I think we really need to keep an open mind to broader possibilities that are quite unnatural in nature. I have read through much of the attached thread and I must say there is room on both sides or multiple sides to provide data evidence (like Rancout's analysis) and not just localized descriptive analysis by itself. This was a global event and the data is out there.
The covid experience in Africa is nothing like the experience in the US, is nothing like the experience Australia, etc.. The trend after regions with mass injection is much more concerning there appears to be an obvious increase in ACM, which is missing in many African countries. I know that there are confounding variables and bad data. That is why the work by Rancourt is important and any rebuttal should be based on the data behind his analysis, not from personal observations that maybe entirely consistent but the issue is not local.
I also would not suggest that there must be consensus science. I am just saying we should try to find out what is knowable and what is softer data. All information is valuable but some more than others.
I think most of us have taken the science of virology somewhat for granted. It's been sold to us as 'settled science' and it's probably nowehere near as settled as we have been led to believe. I certainly would not dismiss Rancourt's work - it does show some very odd peculiarities in the global spread of SARS-CoV-2 and disease prevalence but I do suspect his research has been jumped on by some people who are keen to promote their preferred narrative.
I think you maybe correct, however, I am happy to hear their point of view. The sad thing is all through the thread you were engaged with, I, at no point, saw anything that was falsifiable, which is what science is all about. To me that is a sign that, for myself, there exists insufficient analysis for anyone to hold such strong opinions. Certainly it means, again, only for myself, it is just more background information.
The difference with Rancourt's analysis is the data is there, anyone, with sufficient technical skill, is able to falsify his conclusions, or, Lord forbid, accept some of the findings. Just being silly.
P.S. I am really terribly concerned with our current state of narrative control, but, what I am able to do is uncertain. The fear I have is that, trough narrative control (cancellation of open speech) we are driven towards our own destruction blindfolded. Perhaps, I am just overly dramatic. lol
Yes, I saw that. I don't deny that such technology exists, I just doubt the people who claim that they are being used routinely, all over the world, to start wildfires and incinerate vehicles.
I don't know where you find the energy to debate these clucks. Maybe two years ago I had to start tuning out the chem trail-fearing, the climate-cult bullies, and other "theoreticians". They make my butt and my head hurt simultaneously. And whenever I read "THEY" are out to get "us" my eyes start bleeding. Hat tip to you for engaging them.
I think it's probably OCD! If someone makes a bold claim or challenges me to rebut something, I immediately drill down to the nitty gritty details underlying their claims. Can't help myself!
You are a modern Diogenes, searching for truth and honesty in a world darkened by lies and a shattered moral compass. He carried a lantern thru the streets and was mocked and scorned by those whose name's we no longer remember.
.
I do not believe their is a lantern or a torch bright enough for the task
At what point did I claim that they did? Please read carefully:
"Pierre Kory recently wrote a response to Martin Neil, Jonathan Engler and Jessica Hockett concerning their claim that ‘spikeopathy’ does not explain the novel symptoms associated with COVID-19, plus further claims by Nick Hudson and others that no novel Coronavirus ever existed, there was no identifiable contagious pandemic of a novel, sometimes fatal disease and that ‘Gain of Function is a myth’."
So…a bit like all previously known viral pathogens then?
It’s almost as if the “novelty” which was the foundation of the entire pandemic narrative was merely a PCR-induced mirage which amplified an already endemic signal.
“In conclusion, a novel unknown respiratory virus that is responsible for severe pneumonia, like SARS-CoV-2, could circulate undetected for months or years, be responsible for many deaths, and even become pandemic, until peculiar characteristics of the disease are noticed that allow its identification”.
Stefano Petti: Undetected and Relatively Sustained Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Circulation Worldwide During 2019
Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 74, Issue 7, 1 April 2022
It's definitely a possibility, sure. But it is still novel and this says nothing about the origins of the said virus, whereas we now have EcoHealth Alliance's grubby fingerprints all over the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Since my first days on progressive websites and a few mainstream ones (when comments were allowed), I was always able to see the disruptors in the comments whenever certain trigger words/subjects were broached. Always the same pattern. Very good at disrupting threads or posting insane/vile crap so normies move on and the rest waste their time on some form of troll. Obviously much later it was disclosed that corporate and gvt actors, employees and activists were paid to disrupt. We have the 77th recently. We have countless examples of 'agitators' through the ages.
I also saw the fanatics who believed everything was caused by their obsession, portrayed beautifully by the hordes of "Tories/Brexit caused this" zombies of recent years where no feat is beyond their bête noire. But I saw it also with climate cos totally RWP was caused by Roman tin smelting and forest clearance or that the Tokhu earthquake was climate change!
We also know that behind ever plot to kill people by means of terror, there's usually a intelligence agent from somewhere stoking the hate and/or supplying the means. Not new by any means but it's changed a wee bit from the machinations of the court of old. You could easily see Lewandowsky in Medieval court.
What I'm really trying to say is online has been 'nudged' for quite some time and the nudging has only got more nefarious and sophisticated as time progressess. It's no conspiracy theory, It's a global problem with every country pretty much engaged in it against their own people and their adversaries at home and abroad with legions willing to fall behind whatever the message is rather than rational open discussion where the clear intent is to learn.
I trust very few online for that reason. Some of these people could be fantastics, disruptors, trolls or agents or idiots. As a very old saying goes 'Do not give what is holy to dogs; and do not throw your pearls before swine, or they will trample them under foot and turn and maul you.'
Damn, you just keep impressing more with your fortitude and prudent eye for truth.
I think the major issue that is not understood or discussed is the category of Exosomes in general.
I don’t think the science matters as much as the WEFers et al. stealing our future. Doubt and debate in science is surely a good thing but being forced into a digital panopticon is definitely bad. Of course they use this faux science to justify their actions. For the good of the people is always the alibi of tyrants. I don’t know if there was a pandemic? I heard the numbers of global deaths hardly budged. But that’s the old fashioned definition of a pandemic anyway - I still navigate with a map sometimes. Good thing we don’t have to choose but I always keep RAW’s maxim of maybe logic on the nightstand of life.
Kevin McKernan writes:
"The argument that Bruttel et al. put forward was that SARs-CoV-2 was unique in its even distribution of certain enzyme cut sites that are commonly used with Golden Gate genome assembly strategies. I previously put together a substack on the nature of these interesting TypeIIs restriction enzymes that helps explain why they are such handy tools for generating scar-less or ‘no see-um’ synthetic genome assemblies.
The ZooCrew screamed “Coincidence“.
But now, Emily Kopp from The US Right to Know (USRTK) has obtained additional detail about the DEFUSE proposal that is far more than a smoking gun but ,in fact, is more analogous to finding the gun, fingerprint and confession note in one place.
Emily found evidence that this proposal also listed the very restriction enzyme (BsmBI) that Bruttel et al. claimed could build the virus. Not only did Bruttel et al. notice that BsmBI sites were conveniently evenly spaced throughout the viral genome and this spacing was not only NOT observed in other CVs but that this approach made complete sense as a logical path to manually assembling the genome.
Low and behold the DEFUSE proposal actually contains NEB R0580S part numbers to order these very enzymes to construct the virus in the manner Bruttel et al. predicted.
This is a case closed event!
There is no more debate. C19 was made in a lab. Which lab and when is still a hot topic but it didn’t come from a pangolin courting a bat."
https://anandamide.substack.com/p/the-smoking-gun?
I can't really see how anyone can be arguing that there was no novel virus, no lab release, no GOF virus now. It's just silly.
I have taken viruses for granted, and still do. However, I am quite unsure that a naturally spreading viral pandemic is an appropriate description of what we experienced in the last 3 years.
I have looked a Denis Rancourt's analysis of ACM and it does show a very strange area localized pathogen that is not just spatially nonsensical it is also temporally odd.
I downloaded some data and made a first stab to see what I could see but got lazy, and eventually stayed with the analysis of Rancourt and plots from our world in data. That certainly puts me in a position to posit little.
I think anyone who looks at this in a world wide basis must have serious questions about this pandemic description. Those who looked at the data since the rollout of vaccines must have a serious question about the trend of ACM, and, I don't mean just for the old follks.
For myself, I think we really need to keep an open mind to broader possibilities that are quite unnatural in nature. I have read through much of the attached thread and I must say there is room on both sides or multiple sides to provide data evidence (like Rancout's analysis) and not just localized descriptive analysis by itself. This was a global event and the data is out there.
The covid experience in Africa is nothing like the experience in the US, is nothing like the experience Australia, etc.. The trend after regions with mass injection is much more concerning there appears to be an obvious increase in ACM, which is missing in many African countries. I know that there are confounding variables and bad data. That is why the work by Rancourt is important and any rebuttal should be based on the data behind his analysis, not from personal observations that maybe entirely consistent but the issue is not local.
I also would not suggest that there must be consensus science. I am just saying we should try to find out what is knowable and what is softer data. All information is valuable but some more than others.
I think most of us have taken the science of virology somewhat for granted. It's been sold to us as 'settled science' and it's probably nowehere near as settled as we have been led to believe. I certainly would not dismiss Rancourt's work - it does show some very odd peculiarities in the global spread of SARS-CoV-2 and disease prevalence but I do suspect his research has been jumped on by some people who are keen to promote their preferred narrative.
I think you maybe correct, however, I am happy to hear their point of view. The sad thing is all through the thread you were engaged with, I, at no point, saw anything that was falsifiable, which is what science is all about. To me that is a sign that, for myself, there exists insufficient analysis for anyone to hold such strong opinions. Certainly it means, again, only for myself, it is just more background information.
The difference with Rancourt's analysis is the data is there, anyone, with sufficient technical skill, is able to falsify his conclusions, or, Lord forbid, accept some of the findings. Just being silly.
P.S. I am really terribly concerned with our current state of narrative control, but, what I am able to do is uncertain. The fear I have is that, trough narrative control (cancellation of open speech) we are driven towards our own destruction blindfolded. Perhaps, I am just overly dramatic. lol
Great article. However we may have to start accepting the reality of directed energy weapons. BBC news today
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-68031257
Yes, I saw that. I don't deny that such technology exists, I just doubt the people who claim that they are being used routinely, all over the world, to start wildfires and incinerate vehicles.
Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat.
I don't know where you find the energy to debate these clucks. Maybe two years ago I had to start tuning out the chem trail-fearing, the climate-cult bullies, and other "theoreticians". They make my butt and my head hurt simultaneously. And whenever I read "THEY" are out to get "us" my eyes start bleeding. Hat tip to you for engaging them.
I think it's probably OCD! If someone makes a bold claim or challenges me to rebut something, I immediately drill down to the nitty gritty details underlying their claims. Can't help myself!
I like a fight too but some of these bozos almost seem like bots.
You are a modern Diogenes, searching for truth and honesty in a world darkened by lies and a shattered moral compass. He carried a lantern thru the streets and was mocked and scorned by those whose name's we no longer remember.
.
I do not believe their is a lantern or a torch bright enough for the task
.
HART group (Engler) specifically argues in favour of use of virus model:
https://www.hartgroup.org/virus-model/
At what point did Engler, Hockett & Co claim there was no Coronavirus? Please point to exact quote. (I don't believe they ever said this).
At what point did I claim that they did? Please read carefully:
"Pierre Kory recently wrote a response to Martin Neil, Jonathan Engler and Jessica Hockett concerning their claim that ‘spikeopathy’ does not explain the novel symptoms associated with COVID-19, plus further claims by Nick Hudson and others that no novel Coronavirus ever existed, there was no identifiable contagious pandemic of a novel, sometimes fatal disease and that ‘Gain of Function is a myth’."
Hudson is in the "Co" as per "further claims by Nick Hudson and others that no novel Coronavirus ever existed".
By the way, I think this tweet probably qualifies as rather strong evidence that Engler does not think there was a novel pathogen.
https://twitter.com/jengleruk/status/1747127632267825385
So…a bit like all previously known viral pathogens then?
It’s almost as if the “novelty” which was the foundation of the entire pandemic narrative was merely a PCR-induced mirage which amplified an already endemic signal.
5:24 AM · Jan 16, 2024
3,181 Views
Is this controversial?
“In conclusion, a novel unknown respiratory virus that is responsible for severe pneumonia, like SARS-CoV-2, could circulate undetected for months or years, be responsible for many deaths, and even become pandemic, until peculiar characteristics of the disease are noticed that allow its identification”.
Stefano Petti: Undetected and Relatively Sustained Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 Circulation Worldwide During 2019
Clinical Infectious Diseases, Volume 74, Issue 7, 1 April 2022
It's definitely a possibility, sure. But it is still novel and this says nothing about the origins of the said virus, whereas we now have EcoHealth Alliance's grubby fingerprints all over the SARS-CoV-2 virus.
Not new. Wrote this over two years ago...
https://www.hartgroup.org/a-grandee-exits-stage-left/
Every "variant" of the different Coronavirus is "novel"...
https://www.hartgroup.org/a-possibly-unpopular-null-hypothesis/