So the article was incorrect, though I'd hardly call 50 bacterial isolates something that is everywhere and that only 10 had the necessary properties they were looking for. So very rate, and knowing that it's properties were important, also rare.
The article states that it's never been found again, which is the fact I am correcting. How often or how many times it's been found is irrelevant.
Fact is it's not that rare or tough to find. The times that it HAS been found aren't the only places it exists. If people want to find it, they can easily.
The article proves how rare it is and I keep explaining the same shit. You are out of your depth and obviously can't understand the article, so stop derailing.
It’s been found all over the place.
Below is a study where ten samples were tested from samples in Pakistan
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4217667/
So the article was incorrect, though I'd hardly call 50 bacterial isolates something that is everywhere and that only 10 had the necessary properties they were looking for. So very rate, and knowing that it's properties were important, also rare.
The article states that it's never been found again, which is the fact I am correcting. How often or how many times it's been found is irrelevant.
Fact is it's not that rare or tough to find. The times that it HAS been found aren't the only places it exists. If people want to find it, they can easily.
The article proves how rare it is and I keep explaining the same shit. You are out of your depth and obviously can't understand the article, so stop derailing.
In what way does the article prove how rare it is?