REFERENCE

The song that I'm using there is called going the distance it's from the original Rocky movie for the dude in the in the chat asking going the distance it's called.

And this is stolen from CBS Sunday morning. I've been hearing this since I was a little kid.

And it is time to discuss some biology again ladies and gentlemen we are the control group standing firm. If you're not in the control group at least you know not to take any more shots and these dancers were dorks to battle against good versus a very confused evil. They convinced us to give informed consent for our kids which is just nuts and they're thinking about making us take an ID for this. There are a lot of people who knew better and I think learning biology is definitely the way out the hope is in the history if you can learn the history the recent history and deeper history that entertains how this whole mess was started I think we can all find ourselves in a much much better place but it's gonna it's gonna require some painful reflection on our history and we're gonna need to be free to talk about it for the next few years free to explore it share it and speak about it not just the immunology not just the epidemiology not just the secret data but really things went on and in deliberation as we went to respond to this and the kinds of things that were set in motion this dragon is far from dead not even sure we're really fighting the right dragon sometimes and so it's always nice to go back to the immunology it's always nice to go back to the epidemiology here in America if you've been following me for a while you're here at the top of the wave because you've been staying focused on the biology you haven't been taking the bait on television and you've been trying to love your neighbor and some of the neighbors that have been loving you go biological very well are on that front screen including Greg I don't know what to say Greg might be Greg and Ben Rodney there's really three dudes besides more recently Robert F Kennedy Jr. who are helping sustain this work giga-home biological is a high-resistance information brief brought to you by biologists I am the chief biologist of GigaOhmBiological my name is Jonathan Couey, I have been shaking a can on the internet and trying to figure this out for quite some time now I encourage you to get your own stream I encourage you to do your own research I encourage you to do your own teaching I encourage you to follow in my footsteps in the footsteps of McCairn and and Rick see and and and Mark Kulak and everybody who's doing research and trying to find out the truth I encourage you go ahead start your stream it's your channel going start a podcast anything to get this information out there because you've got to convince everybody to take their hands down we got to convince people to take the hands down from in front of their face because this illusion is sustained only through your active participation hi my name is Jonathan Couey this is GigaOhmBiological.

It is a quite serious stream tonight I guess because the clone war have heated up quite rapidly with people claiming slander, and people crying wolf, nobody crying uncle yet, but there are a lot of cover bands playing right now and we've got to clear up the idea space a little bit here, and clear up the accusatory space a little bit here, and I guess the main message that I would have to start with is that all of the people that are involved in the recent little kerfuffle on the internet need to realize that this is not a game, that we are all adults, maybe even professional adults, and when people who want to be global professional adults, and want to take on a global problem like the pandemic and bio weapons and warfare and clandestine operations in the United States government. You're gonna need to be a big boy you're gonna need to put your big boy pants on, and so you're gonna have to be able to listen to people say things that you don't like or expand on ideas that you don't like, and not immediately assign bad motives to them.

And at the same time you're gonna have to look back at your own behavior and reflect on what it means. For example if you come and visit someone from Tokyo Japan or wherever you live and you decide to come visit someone in a foreign nation like let's say America and let's say Pittsburgh and you give them a two-day warning and then they clear an entire day for you and you don't show up until 11 at night they book a hotel room for you because you can't stay at their house because a guest is already there and you show up at 11 at night and you leave the next day that's not very professional you could call that kind of clownish and that's only the tip of the iceberg with these two guys that will purport to behave as extremely professional but in reality in real life when you're sitting next to them in a booth in a bar after they've traveled 2,000 plus miles to see you and they showed up like eight hours late they don't really want to talk about anything they just want to talk about nonsense like coming to Japan and doing experiments on mice, not about the the actual discussion that should be done when we've already had discussions about, about mice experiments and about why, why would I go to Japan and help somebody do mouse experiments, that they could better off find an objective Japanese mouse scientist to do experiments with and publish independently with, rather than bringing two dissidents together and have them publish and make it even easier to discard the data. But no, absurd ideas like help me write a one-page proposal for 1.5 million dollars and six primate experiments.

These are not people behaving like serious adults. These are people behaving like I don't know what. Either they're playing at a game, or they're being told what to do, or they're not thinking very straight. Because while they insist on a constantly brittle narrative, they also insist on insulting me, they also insist on coming down hard on me, accusing me of saying things, of doing things.

I'm a human just like you are. But I have a family and I've put a lot on the line night after night, and I put myself on the line the last couple days because I think there are people who are not behaving honestly people who are telling stories on the screen while acting differently behind the screen and I'm very upset about it and they seem to be very upset about it and so we're just gonna settle it once and for all tonight it's not gonna be any accusations this is just gonna be science because that's all we need to talk about because these people are not really following whatever the science is they're following a preconceived notion or a set of preconceived notions and they haven't really deviated from these preconceived notions for over a year and a half. No extra data matters, no extra observations matter, no retrospective view matters, nothing. The same brittle narrative for almost two years now, and we're gonna stop it, we're just done, because this is not congruent with what we know. It's not congruent with what we've learned, and they can tell all the stories they want, they can stream all they want, nobody's watching anymore and the reason why nobody's watching is because they can see through this consistently brittle narrative that they keep repeating over and over. And once I lay it out for you tonight there won't be any… It's just sad really. It's like they were caught in a in a finger trap and they just kept pulling.

One of the first things I would like to point out as I start here is that the PBS NewsHour is changing the way we think for a reason, and the reason that I've posited is a reason about the sampling of your medical data sampling of your genetic data and the fact that they need millions more genomes to even get close to a full functional map of the human genome, and some of the diversity present within. And so in order to accomplish this they made sure from the very beginning that we didn't think about all-cause mortality before and after the great change in 2019, they made sure that we thought it was a novel coronavirus and everybody was vulnerable, and they made sure that we thought that antibodies and seroprevalence were very important.

These three ideas were were really important to make this bifurcation occur, where the biologists who were awake knew that we had never immunized against a coronavirus before, and we weren't going to be able to do it now. And the people who are watching TV believed what they were told and it basically separated us right into two, right along those blue and green or blue and red lines that were so conveniently present in the United States. One of the key aspects of the psychological warfare that is being rained down upon us is the poor or co-opt dissident material which is essentially good ideas presented by people like Tucker Carlson, good ideas presented by people like Jim Jordan, good ideas presented by people like Glenn Beck, and good ideas presented by Stu Peters.

Stu Peters is a wonderful example of a guy who seems to have his heart in the right place but just gives the floor to anybody and isn't sophisticated enough to ask any questions. The Died Suddenly video as critiqued by Josh Getsco here is fantastically disappointing because while the parts in the video where they have the morticians and the people running the embalmings finding these long clots, the movie starts out with footage of a Loch Ness monster. And so by three or four minutes into the video you already know that your parents and my parents and my neighbors, they're not gonna watch this video, they're not gonna take it seriously, and right smack dab in the middle of it is the DMED data which we all know was misinterpreted, and it's still just in there like crap we know that Matthew Crawford worked on this data for a long time and found a lot of errors in it, reinterpreted and put out a better understanding of it that's not in the movie at all.

And so it's almost like it's set up to fail. The only people that it can convert are people that are already converted. Another interesting example of people converting people who are already converted is Dr. Kevin McCairn. And this is part of what's bothered me since I don't know when, but how am I supposed to convert and share with other responsible adults a guy who streams with a rainbow dildo with Peter Daszak's head on it behind him for the whole stream? How am I supposed to suggest to people that they should fund experiments with me and Kevin, and with me going to Japan to work with Kevin, who has rainbow dildos of Peter Daszak's head behind him while he streams? And for the first year or more of the pandemic was blaming it on the Jews and whose way of combating the people that he disagrees with is to make memes where they're fed hot dogs, and they're called bimbo Bailey? I understand that there's a certain shtick there that he's supposed to be doing, a certain kind of anti PC shtick that he's supposed to be doing. I'm sorry I'm trying to save the world that my kids are gonna inherit. I'm sorry if I don't have time to regularly promote somebody like that.

And it's taken me a long time to get to the stage where I'm just done with this, but I'm done with it. You got to call a spade a spade, and that's what I've done for the last couple days. If you behave like a clown, or you behave like a very unpredictable person, I'm gonna I'm gonna say you're behaving unpredictably. When he was on this stream with Tim Truth he was yelling at dr. Bailey, not in any way driving anyone from dr. Bailey's camp to the intelligent balanced Mr. Dr. McCairn. But what he effectively did in this stream was make sure that nobody crossed the line. His viewers loved it because he was yelling, “you don't have this science“, “you don't have this science”, and the Tim Bailey's are the dr. Bailey people loved it because dr. Bailey looked like a genius. And when I did a stream questioning why in the world Dr. McCairn would do that, Dr. McCairn put out a stream and destroyed me, made fun of the fact that I didn't connect systemic amyloidosis to possible amyloidosis like there's amyloidosis and then for the next year and a half after this video was made there was always amyloidosis, right? This was made in 2022, couldn't be a year and a half. But he went for the throat and when I critiqued him I didn't go for the throat.

What I said was is it's not very useful if you're gonna go after these guys, if you're not gonna do it respectfully so that maybe we can convert some of them. And maybe it's not them that we convert, maybe Tom Cowan is gonna believe in magic water forever, maybe, maybe Andy Kaufman is gonna say there are no viruses forever, but maybe most of those viewers if they were told about how sequencing can be trusted, and how it can't what are the weaknesses of metagenomic sequencing why shouldn't we worry about those weaknesses. Instead in this video back here Kevin McCairn goes right to millipore sequencing which is misnomer for nanopore sequencing, when nanopore sequencing hasn't really been used by the US government or US CDC at all for sequencing coronavirus. In fact we use a set of primers called the Arctic set and those are for Illumina sequencing. And so we use PCR before we use we before we do sequencing so we're doing metagenomic sequencing, and so that already inspired me, this already inspired me to at least put my my head up and say what's going on here? And why is the systems neuroscience guy who works on Tourette syndrome so confident that he knows all about millipore sequencing?

And of course asking those questions like I said got my head blown off, and it's not no it's not much different now. When I've asked some more questions he's decided to do a stream where he's called it taking a stand, and within the first eight or nine minutes he accuses me of having a conflict of interest because I'm encouraging people to follow Bobby Kennedy and Bobby Kennedy is paying me right now. So that's a conflict of interest. So what is it about clean water and functional FDA and a reasonable vaccine schedule and the fact that he was an anti-vaxxer before any of us? What's the problem with Bobby Kennedy, I wonder. Because of course my point was is that I've been very forthright for the last six months even if I haven't been flying the flag in back of me I've been telling you regularly that he's supporting me and that I've been helping him as a consultant and so there's been no strangeness at all. I've been begging people to share my stream and stop supporting with little donations, it's not necessary right now.

And my disturbance is of course that one of the things that happened is while we were being consultants, some mistakes were made. You know it's… you sign a memorandum of understanding and when you're working on certain materials they're supposed to be people that see them and don't see them. And so whatever happened between CHD and Charles Rixie for them to end that, that, that's not on me. He's his own professional he's his own grown-up, he can make phone calls, he can send emails. And as I've adequately and I think accurately described it basically when his contract was ended he just walked away. Is that odd? I think it kind of is. Is it slander to say that? Absolutely not. Is it, is it slander to wonder why it is that he wasn't more excited about losing his job, upset about it? And so it's really, it's, it's funny for me to listen to to Dr. McCairn come so hard on Rixie side knowing nothing, having been in Pittsburgh and have said nothing.

Basically played me basically played me by coming to Pittsburgh and trying to come to my house and telling me it was gonna be there at lunchtime, then at four o'clock, then at eight o'clock, then he showed up at 11. I don't know what his plan was, but it wasn't to be have a respectful multiple day visit. And so when we got together and we were together there was no business done, there was no real serious work done. We didn't go back to his hotel room which was a suite with two rooms and a fireplace, there, we didn't go back to his room and and stream all night or something like that. It wasn't even discussed, and far be it for me to be the guy who should discuss it because I didn't know he was coming until two days before he came, presumably bought his tickets before then.

I'm sorry but we've got to behave like adults, like professional adults, and what I see in this video is not professional adults. It's desperate performers or something. I don't know what is it what am I supposed to see here. They don't address any of the science that I'm talking about except with snide remarks. They don't actually think about what's going on they don't present what's… I'll give you an example of somebody responding respectfully.

Remember Jikky? I called her or him out on the stream saying that yeah, Jikky is promoting Kevin now I don't know what Jikky is doing but Jikky won't come talk to me. I watched your stream yesterday and obviously disappointed that you feel that way about my contribution to the movement just for the record I not only reached out to you on telegram since August but I also invited you to our very restricted science group on telegram in which you only ever posted once on October 16th, also you will see if you choose to multiple posts where I've supported your view, so therefore it's not correct to say that I didn't reach out to you. Also you remember that I did give you a reason why I didn't appear on the streams, and that has never changed. I really hope you can rejoin us when you believe the time is right. We have a lot of views in common that overlap.

That email is from JikkyLeaks after I slanderously attacked McCairn and all these people that had been involved with this KimDotcom stream or associated with the posts about it. So I said come on the stream and talk, discuss the swarm… swarm clone idea, discuss T cell epitopes, email is fine, let's talk, I don't have enough bandwidth with all this shit going on. Swarm clone is your baby I'm weighing it up while I was looking at the big picture, why did the mortality spike at the same time that they could detect certain sequences by PCR? At the same time I do weekly PCR tests which are negative, so the specificity of the PCR test is really high depending on which platform. Roche is the one they are mostly using here. BGI is a massive false positive rate. So, so he answers and he's talking about the science the individual science points that I've made even after I accused him of being a bad guy. He's talking about the science. Anyway keep in touch. So I replied again, I wanted to reply in a little more detail. First of all me questioning you on stream has resulted in us being in contact again and that's good. Telegram is a nightmare. Kevin has been frustrating because he's never quite totally been my friend he's always been an odd guy in my side mirrors and I've never gotten a good read on him, then he showed up in Pittsburgh two months ago and I knew in an instant something was amiss. I still don't know what but he didn't want to talk, to shut talk shop in person at all except the idea of me going to Japan to do mouse experiments with him. I have explained several times why I think those experiments are just not worth the energy, but again no specifics just hypotheticals. His actual details of his trip to Pittsburgh are too many to list and probably just coincidentally ridiculous. I cannot thank you enough for reaching out it gives me some hope that not everyone is up to something. For me this is about the biology, and Rixie and McCairn and Huff are pushing a narrative of a particular bent that leaves little room for all the other malfeasance that is most definitely a majority of the damage done and being done. That is so obvious to me it shines like a bright red light, oh sorry blinking red light. FFS Huff said live attenuated vaccines are gain of function and good, and he said he's vaccinated for 38 disease… diseases. These people are not actually telling a story that ends with us being free but ends with the US and all borders effectively dissolved, because gain of function viruses are borderless. The only way traceable variants of a single coronavirus circle the earth once every half years with a good deal of help and exaggeration. Otherwise it is mostly an elaborate hoax of sorts, with other more long-term societal goals in mind. I believe that the gain of function virus narrative is the exact cognitive trap into which the West is about to find itself permanently encaged, a cage that may have been in the intended destination all along.

See this is how people normally communicate even when they're upset with each other they send an email they address the points they address them thoroughly and succinctly. Yes I think we are closely aligned on this. Without transparency it's gonna be impossible to know how much is bluster, how much real virus effect, and how much treatment withdrawal effect. I suspect most of the deaths are in the latter group but I can't prove it yet.

Look, the principle of informed consent has been ignored for the duration of the pandemic that we know because they have been lying to us about everything. The question is exactly what have they lied to us about with respect to the virus, and I think it's in the most important question it is, but it's not a question of origin, so much as definition how did they define it, how did they define respiratory disease in the past, and how has that changed. How did they treat unknown respiratory disease in the past, and how has that changed. That's what this was about. That's what Denis Rancourt's paper is about on ResearchGate.

Denis is gonna join me tomorrow morning for a chat at 10 a.m. where we're gonna talk about basically these numbers, this all cause mortality here in light blue, and how through the use of PCR they converted a large portion of this all will cause mortality into what they call COVID. But really what you see here in the blue are excess pneumonia deaths that never happened in previous years, that's the problem, and so I propose this hypothesis on that podcast, and at the end of that podcast I said you don't even really need a deadly gain of function virus for this to have happened. But of course with that limited time I wasn't able to really do it. I mean obviously we can't just turn off the spigot on the system we have and then say hey everyone in the world should get this new vaccine we've given to anyone yet but there must be some way that we grow vaccines mostly in eggs the way we did in 1947 in order to make the transition from getting out of the tried-and-true egg growing which we know gives us results that can be you know beneficial I mean we've done well with that to something that has to be much better you have to prove that this works and then you've got to go through all of the clinical trials phase ones phase twos phase three and then show that this particular product is going to be good over a period of years that alone if it works perfectly is going to take a decade there might be a need or even an urgent call for an entity of excitement out there that's completely disruptive that's not beholden to bureaucratic strings and processes so we really do have a problem of how the world perceives influenza and it's going to be very difficult to change that unless you do it from within and say I don't care what your perception is we're going to address the problem in a disruptive way and in an iterative way because you do need both but it is not too crazy to think that an outbreak of a novel avian virus could occur in China somewhere we could get the RNA sequence from that beam it to a number of regional centers if not local if not even in your home at some point and print those vaccines on their patch and self-administer.

Let me let me make no mistake about it I think Rick Bright is one of the most guilty people here because he is responsible for hydroxychloroquine getting the EUA treatment that it did, and he's also responsible for the pre planned rollout of Remdesivir and the protection of it as the only antiviral to be rolled out in the first year. I think he's evil and I want you to watch this video on YouTube from October 29th 2019 from the Milken Institute so you can see people like Margaret Hamburg and other people that are on the stage here talk about this need to shift the system. Now you can say what you want, but this to me is one of the best examples except for the stuff that from 2011 at the Chatham house, where they also talked very similarly about how we should manipulate people because they're not gonna listen to us. If we just tell them it's the flu. See, all of this has to be taken into context you can't just start with the idea that there's a gain-of-function virus and there's this big panic that started in 2020 and that's the whole story, because it's not.

The whole story involves the prep act and it involves the 21st Century Cures Act, and it involves the Vaccines Act, and all sort of stuff. All the people that were involved in pushing those movements, pushing those legislations through, and then using them as a weapon over the last three years. That's what we're talking about here, and that involved lies that involved exaggeration, and the reason why they're doing it is because they need to permanently change our minds about how we feel about our genetic data, our medical data and our ownership of it. They want it all because they can't get it any other way. That's what this Clone Wars is all about. Is understanding that lying about gain of function research is a far more effective, far more effective psychological operation, and likely the vast majority of what they've done to us. And I'm saying it very awkwardly here, but I think one of the very poor arguments that our friends make are that proportionality wise it's a gain-of-function virus and it killed millions of people, and if they tweak it again it could may made to kill billions of people. It's much more efficient and cheaper than enriching uranium. These are pretty much word-for-word what these people have said over the last few days, and it is with these kinds of hyperbole that I have the most objection. And so the Clone Wars is about clone versus swarm, it's also about RNA and DNA sequencing and whether it was done is being done, versus can be done, and then what the real goals are because the real goals are long-term.

The real goals have nothing to do with public health, they have nothing to do with it probably even transfection really. They really have to do with getting you to not understand anything, to permanently install a dark age where in gain-of-function viruses and their natural counterparts are some of the most influential biological phenomenon our society face, and we need to organize our whole society, our whole economy based on these entities. The way that they've done this, and again you will notice, that Charles and Dr. McCairn all the last couple months that I've been that I've been pushing this idea that it was iatrogenic genocide and that the virus played a very small role they've just ignored me. And it was only till I started talking about the swarm and really saying that this could only be a lab leak, and that there is no coronavirus that can go around the world for three years, then they had a panic attack then they decided that they had to throw up their hands and freak out and do a couple streams from a hotel room and now three in a row, taking a stand against me and Bobby Kennedy and I guess a bunch of other people who are all anti-vaxxers, and all anti gain-of-function virus being real or being a danger.

Because you will notice that both at least it appears that Kevin McCairn is going to try and say that I say that there's no virus, which is of course ridiculous and entirely disingenuous, but again par for the course for how he plays this game. And I don't really know why. I really don't know why other than that there is something other than you know, let's just all save the world together, that's going on here. How many times has he told you I'm an idiot because I didn't agree with him about amyloidosis? how much longer do you think he's gonna tell you that amyloidosis is coming from the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 but not from any other coronavirus, not from any other foreign proteins, not from your own proteins miss folding, but just from SARS-CoV-2 virus? And he's gonna show you on his little and his little amyloid pattern-finding program and he's gonna go right through OC 43 and see the same peaks and and say, well, there's more on SARS spike.

Look, this is the way the TV did it: they changed the way you think about the coronavirus swarm, they used to be hundreds of causes of respiratory disease and now there's only one. It's a super virus hit killed millions, it's still killing people, and if you wanted to tweak it you could make it kill billions. Deadly virus, new form of death, and the tests work. The PCR tests work great, that's the evidence that Charles has that this virus, this gain-of-function virus has killed millions of people. They've also changed the way you think about all-cause mortality. Remember Charles says that none of these people would have died except for this virus was released, and the PCR tests have been used to convince the government that this was definitely a novel pathogen, a lab leak in fact. The DEFUSE proposal being found on that server is also convinced the intelligence agencies that this must be a lab leak. Maybe the DEFUSE proposal wasn't to fool Rixey, maybe the DEFUSE proposal was to fool the entire intelligence agency that lied about it being there.

But they have purposefully omitted all-cause mortality in fact even Rixey has omitted all-cause mortality otherwise he would use it as fo8 {?}. There's no evidence on of all-cause mortality and a coronavirus, at least not in a lot of data from like the Netherlands and and Canada and America. And so just like the television it seems that Charles Rixey and Kevin McCairn regularly omit that all-cause mortality does not belie a novel form of death, a new novel more contagious virus in the history of the of humanity as Rixey calls it. It's funny there's no evidence for it in the all-cause mortality in 2020, isn't that weird? I don't know they change the way that we think about our immune system that's been that's been from the very start McCairn doesn't ever talk about this the stressing of antibodies and the fact that antibodies in your blood can't do anything for your mucosal layer we don't they don't ever talk I guess they're leaving it to me you know because I took two years to learn the immunology so we'll leave the immunology to you we'll cover the bioweapons hypothetical and so the annoying part about this is is that this is all tied together right because seroprevalence was stressed so that people wouldn't doubt the transfection seroprevalence to the spike protein and they've accomplished this again by emphasizing the spike protein is the way it gets in so we block the lock and the key and then it doesn't go they oversimplified our understanding so that we would we would we would think we were giving informed consent but we really weren't that's what those cute videos on PBS NewsHour about how the how the mRNA shots work that's all with all this all still happened and it happened on the background of what they claim is a gain of function virus so here's the thing they also changed our minds about vaccination very aggressively in 2020 very very aggressively equivocating polio smallpox measles mumps rubella and the new coronavirus all the same just wanted posters for different bad guys and this is a new kind of wanted poster a better wanted poster so they middle of misled us about vaccines for national security reasons again because of structural proteins they justified injecting you with a structural protein this novel methodology is gonna work even though it never worked before and we know almost nothing about these things which is something that I will gladly gladly admit that Kevin McCairn has done a reasonably good job at trying to scratch the surface of this nonsense but again I will point out unfortunately if you have a rainbow dildo of Peter Daszak behind you while you claim you found blanks no one's gonna take you seriously buddy while you say it's the Jews for a year and then you find blanks nobody takes you seriously surprise surprise kev why would anybody give you a million and a half dollars to inject six animals and stain them with Congo red when you've never done it before why would they pay to do it in rats because of your rainbow dildos do you see the point we're trying to make here some of us are trying to be grown-ups and we're trying to figure this out and other people see seem to be playing like these high school kid games like we're streaming and playing Zelda instead of doing things we don't really want to do this but we have to because if we don't our children will not be free we've even been transfecting women transfecting pregnant women transfecting pregnant women with with RSV vaccines pushing pneumonia vaccines on old people all of this stuff just ignored because there's a gain-of-function virus we paid for it we're responsible it's really terrible and so again it started here I tried to say it as best I could in ten minutes but it definitely wasn't there but you can hear it at the end of my ten minutes where I say you don't even really need a gain-of-function virus for this to have happened and it could be but if it was it was an RNA infectious clone of a coronavirus because that's the only thing that would give you a good set of PCR positives a good sense of it's gonna stay here it's gonna be strong where we release it but it's not gonna spread very far that's about all they can do and so one of the things that that dispelled was the 1918 flu because Robert Malone and Meryl Nass took it really down in that podcast and explained very nicely how that's baby basically a mythology that has grown over the years one of the other mythical events that often comes up in regard to this kind of thing is the idea that OC 43 was a pandemic in the late 1890s as if they could look in people's journals I guess and see that wow there was really a lot of people sick and they describe it it sounds exactly like OC 43 or maybe it's because somebody like Michael Warrabee says that well I can roll back the phylogenetic clock it seems like it must have zoonotically jumped around 1890 come on guys it's this kind of stuff that we take at face value in all of these papers that has allowed this bamboozlement to occur and so I started asking these questions I don't know if I have all the right answers yet or not but I do know for sure that a lot of people got sand and folds that they didn't like it in and it's still in there now one of the best first discussions about this just purporting it forward was gain of function versus gain of purity and I still think it's a pretty strong first discussion with it again because I really like discussing with Matt a lot here's the deal something happened here and it wasn't a novel cause of death it was a massive change in the way that we treated respiratory disease and it caused a massive increase in the number of people have died from it massive increase in deaths associated with pneumonia it's a basic gist of it you don't need to do much more than that and so if they used a coronavirus like the original SARS that killed 800 and infected 8,000 in order to accomplish this change in order to enact to this change in order to pull these pins that's the crime if we can show that these people knew Ralph Barrick knew that any coronavirus that got out of his lab would never have the potential to pandemic it could epidemic maybe it could get a little town or you know old folks home that was nearby for Dietrich but it's not gonna it's not gonna go around the world for three years Denis Rancourt is gonna be on my show tomorrow we're gonna talk to him in detail about this data he showed that all cause mortality did not really increase until after the shots were rolled out and where it increased it was not in the old people it's in the young people it's correlated with poverty mental illness the truth is painful because this does not indicate a novel cause of death gain a function virus flying around the world killing millions and with a small tweak it could kill billion and that's the story that they told to Kim comm Andrew Huff and Charles Rixie it doesn't matter if in other conversations they've mentioned that there are some other reasons why people died we are now answering the question three years later it is time for a measured adult response it is time for a measured understanding a measured you got to have more insight than that otherwise we are playing right into their hands because one of the reasons why these virologists exist is because they have justified it by suggesting that those viruses are already out there and I'm not so sure that Andrew or Charles are working at all against this narrative and so after I did that they did this thing and in the in the hotel room they said you know that wasn't really against you you're just we were just talking you know trying to clarify that if it's really a swarm you know then it's not I know TV they tell you that it's a pure virus but actually it's really not most of the viral particles don't assemble all of the RNA that they need to be replication competent we learned this from Robert Malone we've learned it from the quasi species papers we're gonna learn it over the next few days because I'm not stopping I can go back to teaching paper after paper after paper if no one else wants to do it especially if people are gonna argue with me and say that I'm being slanderous while they behave like weirdos so I'm thinking that that that there aren't any pandemic viruses in bat caves that there aren't any pandemic viruses that are gonna come out of serial passage there aren't any pandemic viruses that are gonna come out of animal passage and there aren't any pandemic viruses that can be stitched together they can only be made in large quantities and infectious clones that's why I play this video because in this video these people are discussing the need to usurp the system to change it from within to disrupt it and to aim it elsewhere at RNA and at a corona virus and so that's why I'm saying that they can't do this and that's why they are telling you that that's where it came from and they I am saying and I know that it hurts it hurt me to figure it out I am saying that I think we got bamboozled we got fooled we got tricked into believing that we were solving this puzzle Charles and I were solving it with the diffuse proposal which as I've said already the diffuse proposal didn't exist before 2019 18 maybe and so its presence on the server didn't only convince Charles that they that the virus must have come from a lab but it probably convinced a lot of the intelligence community a lot of people in secret meetings and so again solidifying the narrative of how many people get killed look this is the deal I just need you to understand that I am I am sad okay I'm sad because I don't understand why people are behaving like this and I just want to show you yesterday I was I was SMSing with Charles all day and I want you to see where the disconnect is because the disconnect really is frustrating and when you read it and see it in a text it will be really frustrating for you I'm in green I have been consistently impressed with your insistence on the virus part and minimizing the main source of death the system wide nonsensical changes yes I am insistent on the part that has continued to produce evidence helped by the fact that I previously laid out the censorship in great detail the first article I wrote about diffuse was an insanity of the mandates as a result the article the week prior had covered aerosol transmission and the insanity of the nonsensical changes that ignored it but you of all people knew the path that I was working on which didn't really lean on diffuse except he called me about diffuse every day except for the fact that it is proof of intent diffuse and the circumstances around it being hidden are proof mens rea which is half of the equation for a criminal conviction the entire existence of the intelligence community is that a proportion it revolves around plausible diameter oh yeah the intelligence community revolves around plausible deniability which is antithetical to the notion of leaking a document that looked remotely like a blueprint for SARS-CoV-2 so you see he's saying that the diffuse proves it and then leaking it would be crazy so here I ask him yes or no COVID does pandemics after point release that last three years without even lifting the cover page of the document the fact that even classified Biden reported nothing even remotely approaching something like it was proof of perjury so what he's saying is is that while he was holding on to the document for a month looking at it with people like Yuri Dagan and other members of drastic who aren't Americans who we don't know who they are but definitely weren't the original members of drastic like me he says that the Biden report came out and it didn't mention diffuse and said they had no proof it was from a laboratory so then they're bad guys but you had it how do we know that all the intelligence community knew that it was on the server they got a lot of servers but you asked me that specific question had you asked me that specific question I presume that it's this question does a kobe pandemic after point release that last three years he says but had you asked me that question that specific question I would have said no no pandemic lasts three years in the modern world that's a function of evolution in our interconnectedness so he's saying that because we fly around a lot there's a big pandemic and it's that reason otherwise pandemics don't last three years but you are telling that story that a gain-of-function virus is the most contagious infectious in history dude however that's what not you're arguing you're arguing it's all or nothing I'm not arguing it's all or nothing he's not listening he's only hearing that I'm telling him he's wrong or that he's mistaken and he's blown up I understand that it's hard to hear that that's a possibility but considering it shouldn't make your mind explode so he says I believe Omicron came from a lab the Wuhan strain is gone so two lab viruses as opposed to one lab leak blown ridiculously out of proportion as a controlled demolition of the old system in the US this is exactly incorrect I never said it was all or nothing so I respond to that I don't know the number of lab viruses neither do you I absolutely agree it was exaggerated using PCR and other means my guess would be 90% of the cases weren't cases well holy shit does it sound like that he said that on Kim comm or did he say that the virus killed millions of people did he say that the PCR was used fraudulently ever in that hour and a half video that the PCR might have been fraudulently used to extend the number of people or dead how is this congruent with you saying that it's responsible for killing millions and being most infectious virus ever this is exactly in a nutshell what's confusing me about your stance it's a pattern excellent progress here if it's 90% exaggerating stop scaring everyone I looked at the epidemic data from every day in the year including excess deaths did you forget if it's exaggeration of 90% stop scaring everyone we don't know exactly how many cases were bullshit what is clear is that the actual cases were bad imagine having weeks of conversation with a person like this and then have them go public and say that they're just trying to show you that diffuse is evidence 90% of the cases are exaggeration but the crime is gain of function in passage in cell experiments the crime is Eco Health Alliance and the vaccine and the and the viruses that they made that that Andrew Huff is sure they made I'm sorry but if that's not a checkmate for you I don't know what I need to do because something is not congruent if if you think 90% of the cases were faked but then you are constantly telling us that it's the most infectious virus in history it killed millions of people and these people should be held responsible for the deaths that resulted from the virus instead of those deaths resulting from the actions the protocols the lies the deception the no action the prohibition of early treatment and the rollout of transfection this is not a dividing stream ladies and gentlemen this is a it's the way that this works when people aren't playing straight and I I'm if they're playing straight I'm ready to hear it I'm ready to see it but I think we got bamboozled I think the whole dang community got fooled I think I got fooled into writing this this article the way it's written because this this paper is not definitive evidence that Ralph designed it it's definitive evidence that the sequence that they released from Wuhan is a sequence that seems to have some pretty handy endonuclease sites in it restriction enzyme sites in it that's cool about and so that's why I play this because they've fooled us into believing that look children die Ralph has been working on this stuff so Ralph Ralph must have done it long and I'm not I had this slide already in 2020 where I said that the United States government was cooperating with China on public health and biodefense and we were sharing our molecular biological techniques with them in order to make sure that we would have access to the intellectual property that they were collecting over there from their endemic viruses and that we covered this up and I even said that there was a live attenuated vaccine candidate that's likely the source of this virus so it's not like I don't understand what these guys are talking about it's my idea I propose this made this slide before the diffuse proposal was ever released by Rixie and his gang and so I know this this little hypothesis and I know what this little hypothesis really is evidence of it is evidence of this the fact that they've been emphasizing seroprevalence and immunogens and inoculating to immunogens since the start of this guy's tenure and the vaccine Institute center whatever it is at the NIAID it's always been bent on this idea and that's why oh you invented the phantom virus hoping it would scare Eric away that's right and it worked till you guys showed and so then everybody's fooled the lot the the emails fooled us the the censorship fooled us the rising stars on social media were the opposite of confirmation right if all those guys are rising and all these guys are falling it must be true perfectly orchestrated right up and tell two weeks ago and then these guys go on and tell the same story that we've been telling for a year and a half now but now the normies get it this was for the normies so why are we doing this what's going on I know this guy I saw him in person not happy about this I don't I don't want this to be the way that things are but I'm not going to compromise on my gut I'm not going to compromise on my heart not going to compromise on what I think is the truth I'm not going to not say something and I think that there's been some weird stuff going on so taking a stand for who that's my question it's obviously not for Bobby sticking a stand for Rixie I guess definitely not for me I already showed you his text messages I was gonna show them there so anyway the real glows goals of the Clone Wars are what we need to think about now and there and getting there is gonna require us to understand the cartoon that's behind us because I think one of the large assumptions we still haven't really looked into very well we will look into over the next couple weeks is the assumption that coronavirus is proofread themselves and that coronavirus is proofread themselves is one of the arguments against the clone versus the swarm thing and my good friend and very respected I respect very much Kevin McKernan a geneticist and former guy working on the human genome project has been in regular contact with me about the idea of the coronavirus swarm and whether or not it's real or how does it compare to other RNA viruses and he's been pointing out and giving me papers to read about how coronaviruses are capable of proof reading and therefore have an error rate that's quite a bit lower than the average RNA virus and they may not swarm as hard as I'm selling now that's different that's different than the non replication competent particles because those are from the poor assembly of the sub genomic RNAs which we will talk about in a little bit but the mutation rate is somewhat unrelated to the assembly and and production of replication incompetent virions versus you know variants so that's gonna be hard for us to sort out over the next couple days but I assure you that space is sortable and I assure you that we can walk through it without getting too hurt and so we're gonna try and do that over the next few days talk about those things and really learn it and see how strong that literature is again this was the common narrative a long time ago almost two years ago I started putting the common narrative about the ideological bifurcation of America I don't think that this is really adequate to describe what we're currently feeling here we don't know whether this came from but I think it's important to point out that that not too many weeks ago our friend Kevin McCairn and our friend Charles Rixie were more or less promoting our our Lancet chair commissioner who member long time connected person Jeffrey Sachs is a legitimate guy who's being used or something like that who's gonna try and save us bring out the truth very questionable in my mind I said that immediately that weekend I'm just pointing it out again because again these are the same characters that we're dealing with and I do think we need at some point to see the pattern here and so let's talk about these narratives the cognitive trap the three dead ends that we've been talking about for a while the first one is the TV narrative the TVV narrative is pretty easy to understand there was a novel virus at this stage most of the people like the people on the view or the people that watch CNN think that it's probably a lab leak shoot why not there's no previous immunity everyone vulnerable it's constantly changing transfection is there safe and effective millions have died as a result of the virus it's too bad there are so many anti-vaxxers PCR PCR works sequencing is cool data is awesome amyloidosis gain-of-function disease etc are just all part of the fallout that's the TV narrative here's the scooby-doo narrative this is the narrative that I was pushing this is the narrative that I think Andrew Huff and Charles Rixie are still pushing trapped in confused by I don't know not meaning to insult them I'm just trying to point out this is what they believe gain a function virus for sure lab leak super virus I can play the clip of Charles saying it I can play the clip of Andrew agreeing that it could kill billions if you did it right no previous immunity but it's the most infectious ever I mean come on everyone is vulnerable maybe it's ethnically tuned constantly changing transfections are questionable but they also might be a bioweapon millions have died as a result of the virus PCR works sequencing is cool data is awesome even data where we put the spike in places vaccine works maybe just not these are not at this time amyloidosis gain-of-function disease bioweapon it was probably even built into the spike that's the scooby-doo narrative the spike is a designer thing they did it on purpose there's all kinds of parts in there it's crazy what they did that's the scooby-doo narrative now there's another narrative there's the no virus narrative there is no pathogenic virus period there's no previous immunity needed there that right and that nothing viral to be vulnerable to nothing to constantly change transfections aren't are unnecessary those could be a bioweapon millions have died as a result of this botched response PCR has been used incorrectly meta sequencing is fake and much of the data produced during the pandemic has been scandalous might be that the whole of medicine is corrupted all of it and amyloidosis brain inflammation neurodegenerative diseases are all understandable and alternative theories but not published anywhere except blogs and water has memory that's my favorite Tom Cowan thing that he promotes water having memory like you know when you think about or you put a picture of your son's wedding under the the dish it like makes a picture of a wedding ring or something I mean it's hilarious stuff we did a video on it so this is the no virus narrative now can you see why all three of these are basically traps if you realize that gain-of-function viruses can't circle the globe that coronaviruses by themselves really can't cause a pandemic then every one of these three narratives has just a little bit of truth and a whole bunch of BS in it and it's different parts of truth and BS that allow everybody to fight about which one of these it is and for about two and a half years I've been the only person that's been willing to consider all of these I got my head bit off when I suggested that Kevin could have been nicer to dr. Sam Bailey I got my head bit off. I've been ridiculed now regularly of being a no virus guy and pandering to these people pandering to them by mentioning their name or saying they might have a point it's just irrational behavior to me it's not congruent with the thinking person but a person who has specific objectives trying to deny specific things not open-minded enough to realize that we've all been fooled and so here's my alternative dissonant narrative best I can do right now and short notice is that there's no multi-year gain of function virus pandemic there's definitely previous immunity everyone is not equally vulnerable and it's not constantly changing that's because it was probably already there in the background all along the transfections are unnecessary they may also be a bioweapon millions have died as a result of a purposely botched response PCR has been used incorrectly meta sequencing is weak but not fake and much of the data produced during the pandemic has been scandalous it might be that the whole vaccination apparatus is questionable it's supposed to be number nine eight and amyloidosis brain inflammation and neurodegenerative diseases has already existed probably already caused sometimes by viral infection but it's nothing new that we need to now blame exclusively on the SARS spike or something like that when we don't know where it came from to begin with and we didn't know how much was in the background to begin with because so much of it is you know asymptomatic before it collapses so this this is the alternative hypothesis in my mind remember I've said this before that they have tried to bamboozle us into thinking this is the black here that there's a brand new cause of death and before that nobody died of that coronavirus or any coronavirus related to it and my argument has been one of the arguments I put forth regularly is that these lab leaks and that before they found it for the first time it wasn't like it wasn't there was there they just hadn't found it and so it's always been there in the background and because it's always been there in the background it's always been part of this 200 plus causes of respiratory disease every year this is a this is a complex set of causes and so there's no multi-year gain of function pandemic if it's previously endemic in the background you could use a local clone release to scare people to get a PCR positive bump to get a bump in disease but if it's already previously endemic and then on the back of that clone release you would just put out PCR tests you're gonna win if you put some clone DNA in the sewers you can find it with PCR too again it's not constantly changing because it's previously endemic you can just pull up variants from the background Omicron was a variant from the background easy maybe also a bioweapon the transfection of course previously endemic background would mean sequencing and PCR might actually be above board maybe the sequencing and PCR does work it's just measuring viruses in the background like I said a year and a half or two years ago and so the revelation about clones is the idea that if you have an endemic virus in the background and you release a clone in context with a PCR test that can't differentiate between the clone and the background that the clone is based on then you can sustain a pandemic with very little actual infection very little actual disease even if the real cases were serious like Charles tends to assert on a daily basis that Meryl Nass thinks is true from the anecdotal reports that she's heard I'm sure there were people that were sick last year the year before and the year before that there might have been a real nasty one but not millions not billions and so I don't think it's a very subtle difference I don't think it's a very small change to say that a bunch of people were killed by a novel cause or a bunch of people were killed and some of them might have been killed by a clone the top one is a reasonable hypothesis the bottom one is a lie now after trying to explain the bottom one for two and a half years I'm pretty surprised that some of the people that purport to follow me and cooperate with me are still not following the top one but instead are still insisting that there was a brand new cause of death that killed millions of people that was in more infectious than ever when the all-cause mortality doesn't show it when the PCR tests are 90% fake according to him but still selling the bottom narrative I'm telling you ladies and gentlemen it's a trap gain of function viruses as a legitimate threat to you your family your grandchildren it's a trap viruses from nature coming out of a bat cave and circling the earth for two and a half years causing you to close down schools and lose your business it's a trap it's not real and so here we are again the New York Post mistakenly saying that a employee of the weave says that it was a lab leak videos of half are still on YouTube this is all about informed consent ladies and gentlemen it's so that you don't understand it's so that you have more fear uncertainty and doubt than you have any understanding at all and so you make choices that aren't good choices that are coerced choices that aren't informed and so let's look a little bit at sequencing let's just do it and take one example so that I can you know he was very excited to say that the video that I watched the guy says that it can sequence two mega bases who what an idiot Jay is he can't even see that the actual video he's watching is telling him that it can do it except they didn't use nanopore on coronavirus for the whole first year not for the official cases so I watched this video of course and this is the video I would like you I'd encourage you to watch again maybe the second part is also very good and in this video we talk about next generation sequencing we talk about Illumina sequencing for color and two which is what they used in the Wuhan lab to sequence the original pneumonia cases and find SARS-CoV-2 which curiously is the argument that he had with Dr. Bailey on Tim Truth's podcast where he brought up millipore sequencing not nanopore sequencing and claimed that they could get whole genomes with nanopore sequencing which they I bet he can't find a paper where they do it but maybe he can but then this video he gets pretty mad and he's pretty adamant about how sequencing works and how it works great and how nanopore they can get a whole sequence but he fails to note that Dr. Bailey is not talking about nanopore papers he's talking about an Illumina sequencing paper that of course is this one pneumonia outbreak associated with the coronavirus probable bat origin and these are laboratory samples which they do PCR on and if I read the paper very carefully I see they were sent to a laboratory at the Wuhan Institute for diagnosis of the causative pathogen as a laboratory investigating Cov's we first use pan coronavirus PCR primers to test these samples and they cite a paper number 13 in their in their bibliography I'm sir in preparation for the Tim Truth podcast that he was on in May I'm sure that Kevin did all kinds of prep including going backwards and looking at what primers were used here right because then he would have a legitimate calm conversation with somebody about why these these should be trusted if you go to go to that number 13 you find this paper here identification of novel coronaviruses in bats and we can look up how they did it in this paper we have some forward and reverse primers for bat covey detection where we're looking for the RNA dependent RNA polymerase we're looking for the helicase which is actually also that proofreading enzyme exon XON and we're looking for the spike looking for three different spikes if we zoom in over here the characterization of covey RNA to RNA dependent polymerase XON and spike sequences as mentioned above our preliminary data indicated that this novel virus is a group one coronavirus on the basis of conserved regions of group one viruses human coronavirus 229 e human coronavirus nl 63 PEDV TGEV feline infectious something virus and see covey hmm on the basis of conserved regions of group one viruses it's interesting to note that giga ohm biological has been promoting the idea that there are conserved regions across all coronaviruses for which we can form T cell memory throughout our childhood and would have protected us from any laboratory leaked virus it seems that in some ways this paper agrees that there are conserved regions from which they can derive 30 sets of primers that would allow them to find any coronavirus and that those primers and that technique were used in this paper and so I will remind you again how they've changed your mind about the immune system to focus on seroprevalence of structural proteins when they know that the conserved regions of coronaviruses are in the RNA dependent RNA polymerase and the helicase that really important proofreading molecule that everybody's so excited about since Jay mentioned the clone and the swarming they changed your mind about the immune system and how it works because they don't want you to understand what they've done here which has bamboozled you so when you are infected with a virus the PBS NewsHour told you that it replicates very very well but it doesn't really do it like you think it does it they don't have very good data for this number one not all of them are replication competent number two the ones that are replication competent are not all identical number three the vast majority are actually replication incompetent and I think I have some data to support this idea and so when we go to modeling this in our head we are not allowed to think about what they tried to make us think about in the beginning anymore which is some kind of pure clone here but it is a very diverse viral quasi species that you are infected with that's the reason why it's very difficult to grow coronaviruses in the laboratory in culture because there are very few replication competent particles in the swarm that's just the way I think it is I think there's a lot of data out there to serve this purpose another anecdotal observation that I've made is despite the insistence that sequencing is so easy when they do these serial passage experiments where they purport to enrich for viruses they don't ever show us the real intermediate stages of this evolution and in fact they don't show it for a reason because it's probably not there because it's a swarm here a swarm here a swarm here a swarm here a swarm here so sequences aren't really relevant I would guess that the exact same thing is true with animals that's the reason why when they passage the flu and ferrets in 2012 there are no there are no intermediate sequences between before it became airborne and afterward and again the reason why is because this really really high level of fidelity is either only very recently available or in fact exaggerated my guess is is that it's exaggerated and my guess is is that they've exaggerated all of these threats including the natural one under the pretense of permanently locking us down and coercing us out of the sovereignty of our own bodies and more importantly the bodies of our children now I understand that on the pretense that this is proofread my sort of model fluctuates a little bit but what I need you to understand is the replication incompetent portion of the swarm is not dependent on the proofreading because of the way that the coronaviruses assemble and that we can go all the way back to I wonder if we'll recognize any of these names Mark Denison and Ralph Barrick we'll go back to 2011 to one of the seminal papers which describes RNA and and the proofreading and we're gonna look at this in detail but we're not gonna look at that tonight but suffice it to say that the way that they share coronaviruses with one another way they work on them is they make DNA clones because DNA can be proofread DNA is very high fidelity very stable lasts a long long long long time and so using PCR and a lot of other bench basic basic bench techniques you can make as much as you want at very high fidelity and so you combine a cDNA that describes your RNA virus with some bacteria or with a vaccinia virus that can duplicate that DNA and you make lots of copies of it and then you put it in cell culture he makes it with an RNA polymerase and you can send it to people you can use it in vivo you can use it in vitro you can make models of disease based on this pure RNA lots of people argued with me that said that the infectious clones aren't used that way you can't show that it's always that way but I can't it's so many papers.

So let's take two birds with one stone, let's do “Direct RNA nanopore sequencing of full-length coronavirus genomes”. This is exactly what Kevin was getting all excited about. I can't believe he showed that video where the guy says that he can do two mega bases. So of course they can do a whole genome of a coronavirus, right? They just pull it out of the patient and they run it through the nanopore and bingo! There's your, there's your variant. Let's see how they did it in this paper because this is what we're talking about we're talking about every time a virion is made in your body all the genes that are necessary need to be packaged around the end protein and perfect and assembled so that this virion has all the components it needs to make copies of itself and there's an extraordinary amount of hand-waving when it comes to how this process works how reliable it is how high fidelity it is and that's what I'm bringing into question as part of this clone idea so if we look at this paper and we zoom into figure one what they are first describing are the subgenomic RNAs I've explained this before in the context of designing a live attenuated vaccine because Barrick has proposed to change the leader sequences in a live attenuated vaccine so that the leader sequences if they are different would would prohibit the recombination of one set of subgenomic RNAs with that of another so that in co-infection these subgenomic RNAs of a live attenuated vaccine would be unlikely to recombine with any normal coronavirus because their leader sequences were different these leader sequences determine where the RNA polymerase is going to take a pause and going to make a subgenomic RNA which will then form the template for the translation of these proteins so when you sequence a coronavirus out of your nose you're sequencing RNA many of which are likely to be the subgenomic RNAs which are post processed from the original genomic RNA of the virus and so in order to do this correctly we're going to sequence these through nanopores and a lot of the sequences we get are going to be these subgenomic RNAs rather than an entire genomic read because an entire genomic read from the virus is going to be a very rare transcript because during replication subgenomic RNAs are made and during a viral assembly sub genomic RNAs are reassembled and put together at least that's one main theory of how this is done so let's look at the numbers the longest read 26,000 nucleotides that sounds like Kevin McCairn's a hundred percent right Wow they can read the whole genome keep in mind they didn't use this to find the coronavirus in Wuhan and they haven't used it at the CDC they use metagenomic sequencing by Illumina and you can find Scott Gottlieb on TV regularly bragging about his board membership to that company so don't think for one second that any huge amount of data from patients is being made about variants using nanopore sequencing but this is an example of nanopore sequencing using human coronavirus 229e if we look at the total read coverage you will see that we get low read coverage from ORF1 higher read coverage from ORF1B more read coverage from spike even more from E, M and N protein the most abundant protein in the virus and so what we see here is a relative reading of abundance of these sub genomic RNAs there are more sub genomic RNAs for the S protein and the N protein than there are for ORF1A the replicase if we look at a different representation of the total coverage of the genome if this is the total coverage this is the total genome of human coronavirus 229e and these are the small fragments of genes that were read in the nanopore sequencer you will notice that there are a huge number of sequences which encode the N protein lots of redundancy there very few sequences covering these transcripts here one full read from there one full read now I might say oh yeah but it's never gonna be perfect I mean you know this is pretty pretty impressive that it can cover the whole genome like this Kevin was totally right Wow I wonder how they managed to do this huh the two total RNA samples using this study for DRS and alumina sequence we repaired a 24-hour post-infection from huh seven cells infected at an MOI of 3 with recombinant human coronavirus 229e wild-type and human coronavirus 229e with an with a modification before sequence analysis the two RNA samples obtained from here were pooled genetic the generation of recombinant viruses and total RNA isolation was performed as previously described briefly full-length cDNA copies of the genome of human coronavirus 229e and 229e SL2 and 229e SL2b CoV respectively were engineered into recombinant vaccinia viruses use previously described methods next full-length genomic RNAs of these viruses respectively were transcribed in vitro using purified digested genomic DNA of the corresponding recombinant vaccinia viruses as a template they made an RNA infectious clone and when they made an RNA infectious clone the reads that they got were not perfect even though every single possible virus that they could have made competent was competent and still when assembling the viruses what did they see I don't think there's really any way to go about this other than to say that if you start to read the papers and you start to look into it and you see how often pure cDNA clones are used to generate RNA infectious particles that are then used to show that sequencing works or then used to show that we can get full reads from nanopore when you infected cells with an RNA infectious clone and you could only get two full reads how's that gonna work for a patient how's that gonna work from an asymptomatic patient a false positive PCR test do you see what I'm saying that there are no viruses in a in a batcave no viruses from passage that are gonna cause a pandemic but telling this story and making papers that make it seem like it could is exactly what they probably did in order to make this systemic shift from growing flu vaccine and eggs to making RNA viruses aimed whatever they want and don't you see why it's really weird when somebody should probably understand this and then insists insists that it must not be because a document was on a server and released to me I think we were scooby-dooed my friends and I'm gonna keep exploring this idea as hard as sharp and as deep as I can I'm using molecular biologists as my my support and my critique and one of the best ones is Kevin McKernan and Kevin McKernan is on the case he is trying to make sure that I don't ruin myself by going too far down this sequencing doesn't work and if anybody can convince me that sequencing works I think it's Kevin McKernan but that doesn't change anything about this story the fact that they changed you how you think about the human coronavirus swarm about all-cause mortality about your respiratory disease and about vaccination it doesn't change the story here that there was no new cause of death that people were probably dying of this of a related coronavirus for millennia and if this PCR test or the 250 versions of it that were released in the last three years were not as accurate as they purport bingo then there is not a gain-of-function virus killing millions of people we don't need to talk that way we don't need to scare people that way it's a trap long COVID has been around for decades it used to be called like chronic fatigue syndrome used to be called COPD or something like that it's been around forever anybody that's been ventilated in a hospital doesn't come back a hundred percent for months there's all different kinds of that kind of disease long COVID is not something new except for on television it doesn't matter what you think ladies and gentlemen it matters what you just perceive to be true this this is what's perceived to be true right now that this came from a laboratory and the reason why the way that they did it is they've changed the way we think about these things these concepts this biology and the people that insist on focusing on these gain-of-function viruses and on insisting that it's that it's one story one new cause of death they aren't talking about the immune system they're not talking about linked recognition they're not talking about previous immunity they're not talking about memory to non structural proteins they're not talking about memory to redundant proteins like the helicase and the RNA dependent polymerase which for all type one coronaviruses can be used as a source template for primers that work for everybody they changed our mind is about how we think about vaccination and they are still working on this problem right now they are still injecting pregnant people they are still telling us that hits equivalent to infection when it's not they are still telling us that this could have no effect on cancers or on your immune system it can't hurt you at all there's no autoimmunity here we're gonna talk about replication we're gonna talk about replication competence we're gonna talk about proofreading we're gonna talk about it all this week and next don't worry I'm on the case I am NOT this is not a blind spot it's just a important aspect of this that I need to get right and so I need to look at it from a number of different perspectives and I want to make sure that I do it right before I put my head up on that particular issue ladies and gentlemen I think we have been fooled I don't know why this is repeating the alternative dissonant narrative is one of previously endemic SARS coronaviruses that provide a background of real positive PCR of real sequences and a release of a clone on top of that gets you everything that you need they couldn't have done anything else because a clone can't go around the world and make everybody PCR positive in a matter of months this wasn't the most infectious virus in human history regardless of what some of us say I think we're at a time point where the diversity of humans is at a peak I don't think they're gonna be this much data available for their AI ever again and I think that's why they need to change our minds relatively permanently about how we how we shepherd and and our custodians of this data and they want our kids because they only have this time that's it this is what they're doing this is what the plan is tomorrow night on the show tomorrow morning excuse me on the show is going to be Denis G. Rancourt from Canada he is a former tenured physics professor who did a paper about all-cause mortality and on Wednesday I'm gonna have Joseph Lee he is a guy who's got a theory a lot like me which is that antibodies in the blood don't do you much good so I got a couple guests coming this week I'm really excited about thank you very much for joining me this has been giga ohm biological you can find me at giga ohm dot bio it's the alternative to Twitter it's the decentralized the federated version stop all transfections in human ladies and gentlemen because they are trying to eliminate the control group that's still part of the game my name is Jonathan Cooey this giga ohm biological thank you very much for joining me and I will see you guys tomorrow you